Monday, October 29, 2018

HKU FinTech Day 2018 (Programme)

HKU FinTech Day

as part of the 2018 FinTech Education Series @ Hong Kong FinTech Week 
29 October 2018 (Monday), 12:30pm – 5:30pm Large Moot Court, 2/F Cheng Yu Tung Tower The University of Hong Kong 


12:30 – 13:00

13:00 – 13:10
Welcome Remarks
Professor Christopher Chao, Dean, HKU Faculty of Engineering

13:10 – 14:00
Panel Discussion: The Future is Now: Understanding and Preparing for the Implications of Artificial Intelligence

Gary Meggitt, Director, Asian Institute of International Financial Law, HKU
Soujit Ghosh, Co-Founder, Squared-S Artificial Intelligence
Kevin Pereira, Managing Director, blu Artificial Intelligence
Kane Wu, Co-Founder of ThinkCol and Chairman of Hong Kong Data Science Society
David S. Lee, Senior Lecturer, HKU Faculty of Business & Economics

14:00 – 14:15
Special Announcement: Introducing the New FinTech MOOCs

Professor Douglas Arner, HKU Faculty of Law
Professor David Bishop, HKU Faculty of Business & Economics
Professor S.M. Yiu, HKU Department of Computer Science
HKU TELI (Technology Enriched Learning Initiative)
Jen Lee, HKU Faculty of Law
Jon Pederson, HKU Faculty of Business & Economics

14:15 – 14:25

14:25 – 14:30  
Special Announcement: Introducing BASc in FinTech

Professor S.M. Yiu, HKU Department of Computer Science
Dr Alan Kwan, HKU Faculty of Business & Economics

Special Announcement: Introducing LITE

Professor Michael Hor, Dean, HKU Faculty of Law
Brian Tang, Founding Executive Director of Law, Innovation, Technology and Entrepreneurship (LITE) Programme, HKU Faculty of Law

14:30 – 15:00
Be Future Ready in the new Era of ABC: AI, Big Data and Cloud

Maria Hui, HR Director, Microsoft
Bess Chung, Product Marketing Manager, Microsoft

15:00 – 15:10

15:10 – 15:40

15:40 – 16:20
Education for Emerging Cohort of Fintech Entrepreneurs

Maria Pennanen, CEO, Santiment Deutschland

Panel Discussion: Blockchain Fever: How to Cure This Mystery Affliction

Bowie Lau, Founder, MaGESpire
Professor Pedro Eloy, Head of BusinessLab, HKU MBA, Faculty of Business & Economics, CEO of Pelham Grey
Avril Parkin, Co-Chair for the Big Data Committee, FinTech Association of Hong Kong
Maria Pennanen, CEO, Santiment Deutschland
Anil Kudalkar, Co-Founder, MaGESpire Partners

Fintech Startup Fireside Pitches: Planto and MediConCen

Laurence Tang, iDendron
Judging panel of industry experts

16:20 – 17:20

Panel Discussion: Global Leadership in Digital Banking – RegTech as a Secret Sauce

Huiya Yao, Head of FinTech Innovation, WeBank
Max Yevdokimov, Chief Digital CX Officer, Tinkoff Bank
Alex Kong, Founder and CEO, TNG
Brian Tang, Founding Executive Director of LITE Programme, HKU Faculty of Law and Founder of ACMI

17:20 – 17:30
Closing Remarks
Syed Musheer Ahmed, General Manager, FinTech Association of Hong Kong

17:30 – 18:30
Networking in the 1/F foyer of Cheng Yu Tung Tower

HKU FinTech Research and Teaching Showcase will be held in the 1/F foyer

Reserve your seat here 
Enquiries: Flora Leung at

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Wildlife Victim Impact Statement Assists Prosecution in Hong Kong Rhinoceros Horns Case (Sing Tao Daily)

19 October 2018
A Chinese man working in South Africa who smuggled 3.11 kg of rhinoceros horns into Hong Kong from Mozambique in June this year was today sentenced in the District Court to 12 months imprisonment, reduced to 8 months on a guilty plea.
     The defendant, Wei Bin, claimed to work in Mozambique. He flew to Hong Kong on June 17 this year intending to transfer to the mainland to visit relatives. During his period of entry, he was found by the Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department to be carrying rhinoceros horn (Rhinaceae species). As a highly endangered animal and an Appendix 1 listed species, possession of rhinoceros horn is prohibited under CITES (The Convention on Trade in Endangered Species). The defendant told the court that his boss knew that he would return home to visit relatives and promised to pay his ticket cost on the condition he carry rhinoceros horn to Fujian, China, where someone would be waiting to receive it. The defendant also stated that he knew that the goods were rhino horns belonging to the category of Appendix I CITES. The defendant was arrested by the Customs and Excise Department after he was found to have a rhinoceros horn in his baggage and could not produce a certificate of exemption for possession.The prosecutor told the court the estimated market value of the horns was between 830,000 to 1.7 million Hong Kong dollars. ​
     Since August 1, 2018, under the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap 586), anyone who possesses a specimen of Appendix I species is liable on conviction to a fine of 10 million and 10 years' imprisonment. Committed to raising public awareness of wildlife crimes, Amanda Whitfort, a professor at the University of Hong Kong Law School who participated in the amendments to the Ordinance, said that in the past, if the case did not involve a commercial transaction, the court could only sentence the defendant to a maximum fine of HK$100,000 and imprisonment for 1 year. Professor Whitfort lamented past cases in which sentencers had failed to pay due regard to the impact of wildlife crime on the increasing extinction of species globally. Together with staff at the Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden, Professor Whitfort prepared a victim impact statement for rhinoceros which was used by prosecutors in Wei Bin's case to advise the judge on the impact of the crime. The sentence delivered today is the highest ever passed in Hong Kong for the smuggling of rhino horn. 
     Whitfort's research shows that the rising value of Hong Kong seizures in trafficked animals is now comparable with seizures in dangerous drugs. Given their lucrative black market value, and the finality of extinction, she has argued wildlife trafficking cases should be taken by the courts at least as seriously as drug trafficking offences.

Tuesday, October 16, 2018

Embedded Courts Awarded 2018 Distinguished Book Award of the Asian Law & Society Association

Congratulations to Professor Frank He, whose co-authored book, Embedded Courts: Judicial Decision-Making in China (Cambridge University Press 2017) (with Kwai Hang Ng of University of California, San Diego) was awarded the 2018 Distinguished Book Award of the Asian Law & Society Association (ALSA).  The award will be presented at an award ceremony to be held during the ALSA Conference on 1 December 2018 at Bond University.
    Embedded Courts "offers a penetrating discussion of the operation of Chinese courts... [and] explains how Chinese judges rule and how the law is not the only script they follow - political, administrative, social and economic factors all influence verdicts" (CUP website).
     ALSA was established in 2015 with the aims of fostering scholarship and engaging the broader research community. It succeeds the East Asian Law and Society Collaborative Research Network (CRN 33) of the Law & Society Association as the regional body. Its executive office is housed at Waseda University, Japan. ALSA aims to develop the Asian law and society field into a vibrant and cohesive discipline. Its annual meeting provides a timely platform to define the field, advance theory, and cultivate empirical work and new scholarship.
     This year the selection committee consisted of Setsuo Miyazawa (Chair and Immediate Past President of ALSA), Nick Cheesman (Australian National University), Matthew Erie (University of Oxford), Eric Feldman (University of Pennsylvania) and Dimitri Vanoverbele (Catholic University of Leuven). The awards will be presented at the ALSA 2018 Conference, from 29 November to 1 December 2018, at Bond University in Australia.

Sunday, October 14, 2018

Amanda Whitfort on the Duty to Prevent Harm to Children and Animals (Adelaide Law Review)

Amanda Whitfort
Adelaide Law Review
2018, Volume 39, Issue 1
Abstract: Commencing in 2004, the United Kingdom, South Australia, and New Zealand have each introduced new laws to protect children from serious harm within the home. Members of a household in these jurisdictions living with a child can now be held accountable for neglecting to seek help or take preventative action if the child is killed or seriously injured. The new duty to protect children from serious crime within the home recognises the special vulnerability of victims within a closed environment. In New Zealand, the duty specifically extends to staff of institutions where children reside. In the same period, legislation has been expanded to protect animals from acts of negligence, as well as overt cruelty. In practice, however, many of the protections introduced do not apply to animals used in agriculture and research. Legal protection for farm animals has been further eroded by the introduction of so called 'ag-gag' laws. Historically, the recognition of the special vulnerability of children and animals caused their legal protections to develop in tandem. This article examines the case for extending the duty to prevent serious violent crimes against children in the home, to animals in laboratories, abattoirs and on farms. It concludes that effective protection of animals requires the imposition of a new legislative duty to prevent their unlawful serious harm.

Saturday, October 13, 2018

Upcoming Event: "Superwomen in Intellectual Property: A Sharing Session" (25 Oct 2018, 6:30pm, HKU)

Date: October 25, 2018 (Thursday)
Venue: Moot Court, 2/F Cheng Yu Tung Tower, Centennial Campus, The University of Hong Kong
Time: 6:30pm – 8:00pm
Seats are limited. Please register here as soon as possible.
The University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law proudly presents this sharing session as part of its 50th anniversary celebrations. The sharing session brings together four distinguished graduates of the Faculty of Law to share their experience and advice on intellectual property (IP) practice. As leading IP practitioners, they will speak about different career paths in IP practice, ways to accomplish well in IP practice, and major challenges that lie ahead for IP practitioners, among others. Reception with refreshments will start at 5:45pm, October 25 before the sharing session.

Opening Remarks by Haochen Sun, Associate Professor of Law and Director of Law and Technology Centre, HKU Faculty of Law
Anna Wu Hung Yuk
Chairperson, Hong Kong Competition Commission

Winnie Tam SC
Former Chairman, Hong Kong Bar Association; Chairman, Communications Authority

Winnie Yeung
Assistant General Counsel, Microsoft

Annie Tsoi 
Partner, Co-Head of Intellectual Property Department, Deacons

We are in the progress of applying to the Law Society of Hong Kong for 1.5 CPD points for this talk. We will contact you once CPD accreditation is finalized.

For enquiries, please contact LTC Centre Secretary Ms Grace Chan at

Friday, October 12, 2018

Hualing Fu on Reconciling National Security with Hong Kong's High Degree of Autonomy (SCMP)

Hualing Fu
South China Morning Post
12 October 2018
There are two imperatives that shape Hong Kong’s constitutional development: its high degree of autonomy and China’s national security. Should a free and “semi-democratic” Hong Kong protect the security of an authoritarian state and can Hong Kong offer such protection without compromising its value and integrity? Should Hong Kong legislate to protect the security of China’s political system and, if so, how will it reconcile the two conflicting and seeming irreconcilable imperatives? 
     For the central government, there is a genuine fear among top decision-makers that there are national security risks in Hong Kong which the city has turned a blind eye to. As China’s economy grows, it becomes more confident and assertive. When managing Hong Kong affairs, it has started to insist that the special administrative region take China’s national security and other interests more seriously... Click here to read the full article.

Thursday, October 11, 2018

New Issue of Hong Kong Law Journal (Part 2 of 2018)

Editor-in-Chief: Professor Rick Glofcheski
Associate Editor: Professor Albert Chen
Publisher: Sweet & Maxwell





Chinese Law

Book review
Maritime Law and Practice in China, Liang Zhao and Lianjun Li Anselmo Reyes   783

Click here to read the abstracts of each article. Hong Kong Law Journal is published by Sweet & Maxwell. Full text is available on Westlaw.

Daisy Cheung on Mental Health Law in Hong Kong: The Civil Context (HKLJ)

"Mental Health Law in Hong Kong: The Civil Context"
Daisy Cheung
Hong Kong Law Journal
Vol. 48, Part 2 of 2018, pp 461-484
Abstract: This article takes the first step in addressing the paucity of research on mental health law in Hong Kong, in particular the civil context. It argues that the state of civil mental health law in Hong Kong is in dire need of reform due to its archaic nature and insufficient protection of patients’ rights. This article focuses in particular on the following four key areas: (1) compulsory mental health admission and treatment, (2) compulsory mental health treatment in the community, (3) voluntary and informal mental health patients and (4) the concept of mental capacity. It is argued that the law needs to be reformed in each of these areas to ensure that it reflects both modern trends of mental health law, as well as Hong Kong’s commitment to the protection of fundamental human rights.

Marco Wan on Sexual Orientation and the Historiography of Marriage in Hong Kong (HKLJ)

"Sexual Orientation and the Historiography of Marriage in Leung Chun Kwong v Secretary for the Civil Service"
Marco Wan
Hong Kong Law Journal
Vol. 48, Part 2 of 2018, pp 605-622
Abstract:  This article critically examines the Court of Appeal’s historiography of marriage in Leung Chun Kwong v Secretary for the Civil Service. In this case, the court held that the government was right not to recognise the litigant’s overseas same sex marriage for the purposes of granting spousal benefits or allowing joint tax assessment locally. Two main assumptions underpin the court’s reasoning. First, the institution of marriage in Hong Kong is based on a history or tradition specific to the territory, such that the continuing international movement towards the recognition or legalisation of same-sex marriage is largely irrelevant to the territory. Second, prevailing societal views about marriage are coterminous with such history or tradition. This article argues that while the Court of Appeal’s judgment rightly underscores the uniqueness of Hong Kong’s marriage history, it remains wedded to an ahistorical understanding of the local marriage system. This article then presents a survey of marriage traditions that existed for most of the territory’s past and posits that a more nuanced understanding of local history actually supports, rather than undermines, Leung Chun Kwong’s case.

Po Jen Yap & Benjamin Joshua Ong on Judicial Rectification of the Singapore Constitution (HKLJ)

"Judicial Rectification of the Constitution: Can Singapore Courts Be “Mini-Legislatures”?"
Po Jen Yap & Benjamin Joshua Ong 
Hong Kong Law Journal
Vol. 48, Part 2 of 2018, pp 389-398
Abstract: In Wong Souk Yee v Attorney-General, the High Court of Singapore — on its own accord — rectified the country’s Constitution such that a by-election is not required if the only ethnic minority in a multi-racial Group Representation Constituency (GRC) vacates her seat mid-term. This decision makes a mockery of the multi-racial parliamentary representation entrenched in art 39A of the Singapore Constitution, as it allows for elected minority Members of Parliament (MPs) in the GRCs to be expelled from their GRCs by their respective political parties after the election, with no legal repercussion. Furthermore, we argue that exogenous causes that would compel existing MPs to vacate their seats are provided for in art 46(1) of the Singapore Constitution, which, read with arts 39A and 49(1), require every MP in a GRC to vacate his seat when the only ethnic minority MP in that GRC departs. Moreover, the High Court has ignored the Singapore Court of Appeal’s instruction that the Constitution’s express text prevails over extraneous materials unless the ordinary meaning of the express text is manifestly absurd or unreasonable. Finally, the judicial updating/rectification of the Constitution flagrantly flouts its Court of Appeal’s warning against courts becoming “mini-legislatures”.