Showing posts with label Lusina Ho. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lusina Ho. Show all posts

Monday, June 9, 2025

Lusina Ho and Hui Jing on The Dominance of Regulatory Oversight in Chinese Investment Trusts (Asia-Pacific Trusts Law, Volume 3)

"The Dominance of Regulatory Oversight in Chinese Investment Trusts"
Lusina Ho and Hui Jing
Asia-Pacific Trusts Law, Volume 3, Boundaries in Context, Part II, Chapter 10
Hart Publishing
Published online: May 2025

Abstract: A fundamental tenet in the relationship between regulations and private law is their functional dichotomy. Private law deals with the adjudication of bilateral rights and duties between individuals. Its main purpose is to protect the rights of individuals from infringement by others. In contrast, regulations primarily serve public interests, and are typically enforced by regulatory agencies through administrative sanctions or criminal liability. In this chapter, we argue that the Chinese legal regime for investment trusts departs from this paradigmatic dichotomy. Regulatory supervision not only addresses public interest concerns, but also frequently displaces private law in resolving disputes amongst trust parties, blurring the boundary between private law and regulations. We examine the unique circumstances in China that account for this regulatory dominance and argue that it can be justified only as a temporary measure.

Following this introduction, Part II discusses the main reason for regulatory dominance in China. We examine how the widespread use of investment trusts for shadow banking raises public interest concerns when private law rights are enforced in such trusts. In Part III, we explore the use and limitations of regulatory supervision to address both the public interest and private law concerns raised by trust (mal)practice. Part IV contends that whilst regulations can be an effective interim measure for addressing private law disputes, legislators should in the long term adopt a proactive approach and enact trust laws that clearly define the rights and responsibilities of the trust parties. Part V concludes.

Full text of this chapter is available on SSRN, please click here.

Monday, February 5, 2024

Peter Chau and Lusina Ho on Agreement and Restitutionary Liability for Mistaken Payments (OUP book chapter)

"Agreement and Restitutionary Liability for Mistaken Payments"
Peter Chau, Lusina Ho
in Sagi Peari (ed.), Warren Swain (ed.), Rethinking Unjust Enrichment: History, Sociology, Doctrine, and Theory, (Oxford University Press,December 2023),pp. 181-200
Published online: December 2023

Abstract: This chapter considers two recent attempts that claim a defendant’s actual or hypothetical agreement as grounds for restitutionary liability for mistaken payments. With respect to Alexander Georgiou’s attempt based on an actual but tacit agreement, it argues that his account: (1) confuses the motivating causes of the payment with the terms of the payment; (2) rests on a long chain of inference that raises doubt as to the general applicability of his argument to cases of mistaken payment; and (3) offers little guidance on when restitutionary liability should be imposed. With respect to Titiana Cutts’s argument, which is inspired by TM Scanlon’s idea of reasonable agreement, the chapter argues that: (1) the principles considered in her contractualist pairwise comparison are unduly limited and (2) the considerations she takes into account in deciding between principles, such as the security of a party’s plans and the impact on people with limited means, are not specific enough for her conclusion. For example, these considerations cannot explain why reasonable people must choose a principle that gives payors who paid upon a relevant mistake a general right to restitution, but not when they paid upon a misprediction.

Sunday, March 6, 2022

HKU Law Research Output Prize Winners 2020-21

Congratulations to the following University and Faculty of Law Research Output Prize Winners 2021-2022:
The Selection Panel, comprised of the members of the Faculty Research Committee, was deeply impressed with the awardees’ quality of outputs, especially their original insight and thoughtful presentation.

Friday, January 7, 2022

Lusina Ho on Assessing Capacity for Lifetime and Testamentary Dispositions (HKLJ)

"Assessing Capacity for Lifetime and Testamentary Dispositions"
Lusina Ho
Hong Kong Law Journal, 
2021, Vol. 51, Part 3 of 2021, pp. 853-874
Abstract: In recent years, there has been an increase in litigation on mental capacity in making wills and lifetime dispositions, because people have more complex family structures and live longer to reach an age when there is a greater statistical risk of dementia. Currently, the capacity tests vary depending on the type and complexity of the transaction in question. This article argues that the size and complexity of a transaction tell us only in which direction these criteria correlate with the requisite level of capacity and not what level is actually set. The requisite information required in individual cases should also take into account the underlying interests in the cases. Doing so ensures that similar cases are treated alike and the law of capacity assessment develops in a coherent manner.

Monday, October 25, 2021

Lusina Ho on The Mental Element in Equitable Accessory Liability (Current Legal Problems)


"The Mental Element in Equitable Accessory Liability"
Lusina Ho
Published: 1 June 2021
Abstract: There has been heated debate over the test of dishonesty since it was first laid down in Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan. This paper argues that the essence of ‘dishonest’ assistance is willing participation in a breach of trust, that is, assistants endorse or accept their causal role in bringing it about. Three implications follow. First, the mental element should be fixed at the minimum level necessary to reflect endorsement rather than varying by the degree of causal contribution to the primary wrong. Second, the test of neither dishonesty nor knowledge fully captures the requisite mental element for endorsement. Third, a test framed in terms of intention and belief concerning the core elements of a breach would better identify the mental element of accessory liability in equity. This reformulated test would add much-needed transparency to mental element determination for equitable accessory liability.

Friday, October 2, 2020

HKU Law Begins 2020/21 with $12 Million in New Competitive Research Funding

Congratulations to our 8 colleagues who were successful in their research funding applications this year in competitive exercises conducted by external funding bodies.

RGC Senior Research Fellowship 2020/21
Professor Douglas Arner was awarded an inaugural RGC Senior Research Fellowship by the Research Grants Council.  This fellowship in the amount of $7,798,380 enables Professor Arner to deepen his research on "Digital Finance, Financial Inclusion and Sustainability: Building Better Financial Systems" over the next five years.  This fellowship builds on the RGC Research Impact Fund award Professor Arner obtained in the 2018/19 exercise.

Public Policy Research Funding Scheme 2020/21
Ms Amanda Whitfort was awarded a Public Policy Research (PPR) grant from the Policy Innovation and Co-ordination Office in the amount of $462,019.  She will conduct "An Empirical Study of the Nature of Animal Abuse Cases in Hong Kong from 2013-2019" over the next 12 months.  Ms Whitfort's 2008 PPR project, "Review of animal welfare legislation in Hong Kong", produced an influential policy report that improved the welfare of pets and animals in Hong Kong by triggering impactful legislative and policy reforms.

RGC General Research Fund 2020/21
Six colleagues were awarded General Research Fund (GRF) grants by the Research Grants Council in the 2020/21 round. The GRF success rate was 40%, compared to last year's 31%. The projects cover a range of legal topics of importance to Hong Kong, China and beyond. The details of the new funded projects are as follows:
Dr Clement Chen, Accountability in Algorithm-assisted Sanctions: Public Law Scrutiny of China’s Social Credit System, $705,920

Prof Frank He Xin, The Personal Safety Protection Order against Domestic Violence in China, $924,000

Prof Lusina Ho, A Comprehensive Examination of Judicial Practice on the Chinese Trust Law, $650,064

Ms Rebecca Lee, Rebuilding Trust and Legitimacy for Charities in Hong Kong, $375,000

Dr Michael Ng, Liberating Hong Kong: The awakening of freedom of expression and the rule of law in British Hong Kong (1978-1997), $591,400

Dr Marco Wan, The Construction of Sexual Minority Identities in Legal and Political Discourse in Hong Kong, $585,080

Tuesday, August 11, 2020

Lusina Ho on Unjust Enrichment and Equity (new book chapter)

"Unjust Enrichment and Equity"
in  Elise Bant, Kit Barker, Simone Degeling (eds), Research Handbook on Unjust Enrichment and Restitution (Edward Elgar, July 2020), Chapter 7
Summary: The proper relationship between unjust enrichment and equity has long been the subject of spirited debates. At the theoretical level, there is debate as to whether the idea of conscience is better than unjust enrichment in explaining and categorising instances of restitutionary liability previously available under quasi-contract. At the doctrinal level, it has been argued that the equitable doctrines of knowing receipt and undue influence are better classified as claims to reverse unjust enrichment. Furthermore, where both common law and equitable rules are applicable to a claim in unjust enrichment, there are calls to assimilate the rules to achieve coherence and consistency. The present chapter explores all these issues.

Thursday, August 29, 2019

HKU Excellence Awards 2018 (Faculty of Law Awardees)

Congratulations to all Faculty of Law colleagues who were recognised in the HKU Excellence Awards 2018.
OUTSTANDING YOUNG RESEARCHER AWARD
Miss Cora CHAN Sau Wai, Department of Law
Dr GU Weixia, Department of Law

KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE EXCELLENCE AWARD
'Introducing the Special Needs Trust to Hong Kong'

FACULTY TEACHING AWARDS
Dr Peter CHAU Siu Chun, Department of Law
Ms Daisy CHEUNG Tin Muk, Department of Law
Dr Eric IP Chi Yeung, Department of Law

RESEARCH OUTPUT PRIZE
Chinese Small Property: The Co-Evolution of Law and Social Norms
By Dr QIAO Shitong, published by CUP 2017, 230 pp

FACULTY KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE AWARD
'Introducing the Special Needs Trust to Hong Kong'

More details of the 2018 HKU awards can be found here.  To view the video clips of the ceremony, Outstanding Young Researcher Awards and Knowledge Exchange Excellence Award, click here.

Sunday, August 11, 2019

New Book: Special Needs Financial Planning: A Comparative Perspective (Cambridge University Press)

Special Needs Financial Planning: A Comparative Perspective
Edited by Lusina Ho & Rebecca Lee
June 2019, Cambridge University Press, 368 pp
Description: Countries around the world are facing pressing needs to enhance financial planning mechanisms for individuals with cognitive impairment. The book provides the first comparative study of the three most common of such mechanisms in Asia and the West, namely guardianship, enduring/lasting powers of attorney, and special needs trusts. It involves not only scholarly overviews of the mechanisms in the jurisdictions studied, but also thorough, structured and critical reviews of their operational experiences. This book will have broad appeal to scholars, students, law and policy makers and practitioners in the fields of mental disability, healthcare and elder law. It is widely recognised in the field that books like this one are needed. This book will also be of interest to undergraduate and graduate students in mental health, disability law and elder law.

Sunday, February 17, 2019

Lusina Ho and Rebecca Lee Awarded HKU's KE Excellence Award 2018 for Special Needs Trust

L-R: L Ho & R Lee
Congratulations to Lusina Ho and Rebecca Lee who were awarded HKU's Knowledge Exchange (KE) Excellence Award 2018 for their impactful special needs trust (SNT) project.  In 2016, Ho and Lee researched and recommended the innovative idea of a government-led trust to assist persons with special needs, including those with intellectual disabilities and cognitive impairments, and their families by providing affordable long-term asset management services.  The Hong Kong government readily took up the idea, which was mentioned in the Chief Executive's Policy Addresses in 2016, 2017 and 2018.  In late 2018, the Hong Kong rolled out the new service (see Press Release) and announced that it would begin to accept applications in March 2019.  Ho and Lee's idea of a government-led SNT is already informing policy-making in other jurisdictions including South Korea.  This is the second time the Faculty of Law has won this university wide award since 2015 when it was created.

Friday, July 13, 2018

RGC Awards $6 Million in Research Grant Funding to HKU Faculty of Law

Congratulations to our 11 colleagues who were successful in the 2018-2019 round of research grant funding by Hong Kong's Research Grants Council (RGC).  The success rate for General Research Fund (GRF) projects was 73%, a little better than last year.  The projects cover a range of legal topics of importance to Hong Kong, China and beyond.  This year the largest grant was awarded to Dr Richard Wu for his ongoing and expansive study of law student values.  This is the fifth RGC grant Dr Wu has received in support of his comparative study of law students in 14 jurisdictions.  The details of the new 11 GRF projects are as follows:

Monday, October 30, 2017

Lusina Ho's Account of Accounts (Singapore Academy of Law Journal)

"An Account of Accounts"
Lusina Ho
Singapore Academy of Law Journal
2016, Volume 28, pp 849-883 (Special Issue on Remedies)
Abstract: The equitable accounting rules are notorious for being ancient and technical, and hence hinder the development of the rules governing compensating claims against trustees. The present article seeks to overcome these difficulties by conducting a historical survey of the traditional accounting rules in order to identify their governing principle. It argues that equity acts on a principle different from common law, in that the purpose of accounting is to restore the beneficiaries or the trust fund, as from the time when the trustee departed from his duty, to the position they would have been in had the trustee performed his duty. This way, equity achieves exact justice so that the beneficiaries will not be kept out of their rights from the time when performance was due to the time when it is actually obtained. To do so, equity adopts the legal fiction of treating the unauthorised disbursement as having never been made and the property as having already been obtained. The article argues that this fundamental norm should also be applicable to equitable compensation, and proposes analysing this remedy on the basis of the duties breached, rather than the type of breach as in traditional accounting rules. It then uses this new framework to propose detailed remedial rules for various breaches of duty by the trustee.  Click here to download the full article.

Monday, July 3, 2017

RGC Awards $8.5 Million in Research Grant Funding to HKU Faculty of Law

The Faculty of Law has performed exceptionally well in the 2017-2018 round of research grants awarded by the Research Grants Council (RGC).  The RGC awarded more than HK$8.46 million in funding to 10 General Research Fund (GRF) projects and 3 Early Career Scheme (ECS) projects. This is more than double the amount awarded for the 2016-2017 year.  The success rate for this year was 71% (GRF) and 100% (ECS) respectively.  The projects tackle important issues in constitutional law, trust law, human rights law, legal education, legal history and theory, and land law.  Some are inter-disciplinary.  The largest grant of more than $1 million went to Professor Hualing Fu for his project on police power in transition societies including China.  Congratulations to the following 13 colleagues:
  • Po Jen Yap, Courts and Democracies in Asia, $736,600, GRF, 36 months
  • Hualing Fu, Police Power in Transition Societies: China in Comparative Perspectives, $1,058,488, GRF, 36 months
  • Rebecca Lee (Co-I: Lusina Ho), The Modern International Trust Under Siege: Legislature, Judiciary, and Theoretical Implications, $361,675, GRF, 24 months
  • David Law, The Language and Ideology of Constitutions: A Computational Linguistics Analysis, $784,538, GRF, 36 months
  • Lusina Ho (Co-I: Rebecca Lee), Developing Compensatory Remedies for Breaches of Trust and Fiduciary Duties, $512,198, GRF, 24 months
  • Eric Ip, The Constitutional Foundations of Free Markets: Economic Provisions of the Hong Kong Basic Law in Comparative Perspective, $892,484, GRF, 36 months
  • Kelley Loper, International human rights law and refugee protection in Asian states not party to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, $563,640, GRF, 24 months
  • Jianlin Chen, Law, State and Emerging Natural Resources: Theoretical Perspective and Case Study of Climate Resource Management in China, $570,000, GRF, 36 months
  • Richard Wu, An Empirical and Comparative Study of Law Students’ Perceptions of Their Values in Four Fastest-Growing Asian Countries: China, India, Thailand and Philippines, $844,880, GRF, 36 months
  • Michael Ng, Freedom of Expression, Media Censorship and the Rule of Law in British Hong Kong (1850s-1980s), GRF, 36 months
  • Daisy Cheung, Finding the Right Balance: Constructing a Theoretical Approach for the Assessment of Guardianship Systems for the Mentally Incapacitated in East Asia, ECS, $446,560, 36 months
  • Dan Matthews, The Aesthetics of Sovereignty in the Age of the Anthropocene, $289,032, ECS, 24 months
  • Shitong Qiao, National Laws and Local Land Reforms: The Spectrum of Legality, $555,400, ECS, 36 months.

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Lusina Ho on Causation in the Restoration of a Misapplied Trust Fund (new book chapter)

"Causation in the Restoration of a Misapplied Trust Fund: Fundamental Norm or Red Herring?"
in S Degeling & JNE Varuhas (eds), Equitable Compensation and Disgorgement of Profit (Hart Publishing, 2017) ch 8
Introduction: When a beneficiary seeks relief for misapplied trust assets, the emerging if not prevailing view amongst commentators is that he is but exercising his primary right to performance of the trust. The beneficiary is not seeking compensation for the factual detriment caused by the breach. Thus, whether the claim assumes the form of taking a common account or equitable compensation (an unfortunate misnomer in this context), the substance of the ultimate monetary award is essentially one for an ‘equitable debt’, for which issues of breach or causation – whether factual or legal – are irrelevant. 
     The United Kingdom Supreme Court in AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler & Co, however, was not swayed by these advocacies. The Court subsumed substitutive performance and reparative compensation under a unitary principle that it considered fundamental to all remedies, namely that: ‘the basic purpose of any remedy [is] to put the beneficiary in the same position as if the breach had not occurred. It held that ‘but for’ causation applies to the accounting of misapplied trust funds. Lord Toulson dismissed arguments based on the orthodox accounting procedure as ‘fairy tales’. Lord Reed, in a more forward-looking approach, preferred to fashion remedies to reflect the characteristics of the particular obligation breached rather than its historical origin, albeit his Lordship did not explain how this was to be done. The reasoning in AIB Group has drawn considerable criticism, predictably from commentators who consider that the debt characterization self-evidently demonstrates the irrelevance of but-for causation. 
     Unfortunately, the impasse between the UK Supreme Court and its critics is due, in great part, to the failure to address the policy justification of the orthodox position. On the one hand, the switching of the label of the claim from account to equitable compensation has confusingly misled the Supreme Court into compensatory thinking. On the other hand, even if there is a grain of truth in analogizing the traditional accounting remedy with debt and specific performance, it does not prohibit fashioning equitable compensation to ameliorate any potential hardship and injustice that may be brought by a strict adherence to the analogy. 
     The chapter seeks therefore to reinforce the underlying policy justifications of the orthodox position, and at the same time investigate possible situations where modification of the orthodox position is called for. To achieve this task, the chapter will, first, examine the historical approaches in common accounts, whereby it observes that amongst the plethora of earlier cases cited by critics of the compensation view, only a few expressly pronounce on the irrelevance of but-for causation; but, notwithstanding the dearth of direct authority on causation, it is well established that the nature of falsification is performance of the trustee’s fundamental duty to account rather than compensation. Secondly, to bolster arguments based on the nature of the remedy as debt or specific performance, the chapter will take up Lord Reed’s appeal to fashion remedies based on the justification of the duties breached; such a line of inquiry will show the orthodox position to be fully justified, at least as a default rule. The chapter will also explore situations where these underlying policies justify modifying the orthodox position. Lastly, the chapter examines how the decision in AIB Group may be reconciled with existing orthodox rules that permit beneficiaries to adopt or ratify the breaches of defaulting trustees, albeit it could also have provided the occasion for modifying the orthodox rules.

Thursday, June 8, 2017

Fourth Legal Scholarship Workshop @ HKU (LSW@HKU) (Report)

The Fourth Legal Scholarship Workshop @ HKU (4th LSW@HKU) was held at the Faculty of Law on 1-2 June 2017. Eight current PhD candidates from Yale University, University of Chicago, Cambridge University, Queens Mary University of London, Victoria University of Wellington, National University of Singapore, University of Cape Town and HKU presented papers on a wide range of legal topics including private regulatory responses to maritime piracy; how non-state actors may unilaterally create international law obligations; empirical testing on how arbitrators’ reputation shaped their decisions; field work on gender and judicial appointments in Africa; international law responses to domestic rape; law reform to tackle novel technologies; critical analysis of communitarianism as a jurisprudential basis for constitutional order; and, clashing sovereigns in law and religion. 
   The presenters, together with our students and invited participants from Yale University, Tsinghua University and Chinese University of Hong Kong, engaged in intensive, vibrant and earnest discussion on both the substance of the presented papers and stylistic aspect of the presentation. They also benefited tremendously from the keynote session by Professor Lusina Ho and Professor John Lowry who shared their vast experiences and insights on the academic hiring process. 
     The workshop was organized and conducted by Dr Chen Jianlin.

Thursday, January 12, 2017

Strong Demand for Special Needs Trust for Intellectually Disabled (HKU Study)

A survey has found that there is a strong demand for a Special Needs Trust (SNT) in Hong Kong to provide affordable financial planning services for individuals with intellectual disability, and for the Government to act as the trustee of such a trust. 
     The survey, which targeted at parents of individuals with intellectual disability, was carried out in 2016 by Professor Lusina Ho and Associate Professor Rebecca Lee at the Faculty of Law of the University of Hong Kong (HKU) and the Concern Group of Guardianship System and Financial Affairs*.
     According to government statistics, between 71,000 and 101,000 people in Hong Kong are persons with intellectual disability. As existing mechanisms for the financial planning for these individuals are limited, many parents are concerned that after their passing, the care for their children with intellectual disability would be upset. Following the 2016 Policy Address of the Hong Kong Government, the Labour and Welfare Bureau is exploring the feasibility of setting up a trust to provide affordable financial services to these individuals.

What is a Special Needs Trust (SNT)?
An SNT is an affordable trust specially designed for people with special needs (including people with intellectual disability). An SNT can reduce the cost of administration by pooling funds contributed by parents for management and investment. However, like in an MPF, the amounts designated for each beneficiary will be segregated. 
     To participate in such trusts, the parents (as settlors) with the help of the trustee and its case manager devise a care plan, which sets out the expenditures needed for the dependent-beneficiary, write a letter of intent that appoints a caregiver to succeed them and explains how the trust fund should be disbursed for the benefit of the dependent and after the dependent passes away, and then transfer a nominal sum to set up the trust. They also execute a will to transfer a substantial amount from their estate into the trust on their death, e.g. they may instruct the executor to sell their flat and put the proceeds into the trust fund. Of course, the parents may also transfer substantial assets into the trust during their lifetime.
     When the parents pass away, the trust will be activated. The trustee will then make periodic distribution to the succeeding caregiver according to the letter of intent and care plan. The trustee’s case manager can make periodic visits to the dependent to check that the caregiver is looking after the dependent. Upon the dependent’s passing, the trustee will distribute the surplus to any person(s) indicated in the letter of intent.

Strong demand for a government-operated SNT
The first territory-wide questionnaire survey of parent opinions on setting up an SNT received an overwhelming response of over 2,500 valid returns. The survey results show that parents of individuals with intellectual disability consider existing legal mechanisms for financial planning inadequate. The results suggest that:
(1) there is a strong demand for an SNT to be established in Hong Kong;
(2) the parents’ top priority (and the exclusive preference of almost half of them) is for the Government to act as the trustee of the SNT;
(3) if the Government acts as trustee, nearly half of the parents surveyed are likely or very likely to participate in the SNT;
(4) the following features of the SNT are most attractive to parents:
  • the provision of a case manager to monitor the care received by their children;
  • the annual fees of the SNT do not exceed 1% of the managed assets; and
  • the presence of parent representation in trust management; and
(5) parents who are most likely to participate in the SNT are aged 40-59 looking after dependents with intellectual disability aged 39 or below, and the dependents are with mild or moderate intellectual disability and are not in receipt of any social welfare benefits
(except Disability Allowance).
     The research is supported by RGC General Research Fund 2016-2017 (project number: 17612916). The survey report (in bilingual versions), press photos and presentation slides can be downloaded from www.snt.support. Or click this link to view the survey report. A video of the event launching the survey can be viewed here.
      For media enquiries, please contact: Ms Scarlette Cheung, Faculty of Law, HKU (Tel: 39172919; Email: scarlettecheung@hku.hk); or Ms Melanie Wan, Communications and Public Affairs Office, HKU (tel: 2859 2600; Email: melwkwan@hku.hk).
* The Concern Group of Guardianship System and Financial Affairs is established by a group of parents and caregivers of persons with intellectual disability. Its mission is to strive for a better adult guardianship system through examining its current weaknesses and seeking for improvements of the policies and institutions pertaining to adult guardianship. It is hoped that these efforts will enhance personal care and financial management arrangements for individuals with intellectual disability in Hong Kong.

Saturday, January 7, 2017

Event: Survey Results on Special Needs Trust in Hong Kong (10 Jan 2017)

HKU Faculty of Law to present results and observations from “Questionnaire Survey on Ascertaining the need for Special Needs Trusts in Hong Kong”

According to government statistics, between 71,000 and 101,000 people in Hong Kong have intellectual disability. As existing mechanisms for the financial planning for these individuals are limited, many parents are concerned that after their passing, the care for their children with intellectual disability would be upset. Following the 2016 Policy Address of the Hong Kong Government, the Labour and Welfare Bureau is exploring the feasibility of setting up a trust to provide affordable financial services to these individuals. A Special Needs Trust (SNT) can reduce the cost of administration by pooling funds contributed by parents. Between March and May 2016, the Faculty of Law of the University of Hong Kong and the Concern Group of Guardianship System and Financial Affairs jointly carried out a questionnaire survey of parent opinions on setting up an SNT in Hong Kong. The survey received an overwhelming response of over 2,500 valid returns.
     Professor Lusina Ho and Associate Professor Ms Rebecca Lee of the Faculty of Law will in the press conference present the key findings and observations of the survey. Details are as follows:
Date: January 10, 2017 (Tuesday)
Time: 10:30 am to 12:30 pm
Venue: Moot Court, 2/F, Cheng Yu Tung Tower, Centennial Campus, the University of Hong Kong (Exit C1, HKU MTR station)
Organisers: Faculty of Law, the University of Hong Kong & The Concern Group of Guardianship System and Financial Affairs
Moderator: Ms Anna Lee
Language: Cantonese
The report can be downloaded (after 12:30pm on January 10) at: http://snt.support/.
     For media enquiries, please contact: Ms Scarlette Cheung, Faculty of Law, HKU (Tel: 39172919; Email: scarlettecheung@hku.hk); or Ms Melanie Wan, Communications and Public Affairs Office, HKU (tel: 2859 2600; Email: melwkwan@hku.hk).

Saturday, May 23, 2015

Lusina Ho on Equitable Compensation

"Equitable compensation on the road to Damascus?"
Lusina Ho
Law Quarterly Review
(2015) 131 (April), pp. 213-218
In the controversial decision in Target Holdings v Redferns [1996] A.C. 421; [1995] 3 All E.R. 785, the House of Lords held that a doctrine of causation applied to the assessment of equitable compensation for misapplied trust funds, albeit it might not directly apply the rules of causation and remoteness at common law. Ever since then, powerful criticisms have been levelled against this approach, primarily on the ground that the beneficiary’s right to take common account and falsify an unauthorised disbursement is an exercise of their primary right—very much like an action for a liquidated sum—and hence the doctrine of causation is irrelevant... 
     Almost two decades had passed when the same issue reached the Supreme Court in AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler & Co [2014] UKSC 58; [2014] 3 W.L.R. 1367. Having taken cognisance of nearly 900 pages of academic writing submitted to it, the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed Target Holdings. Their Lordships considered it a "backward step" to rely on the "historical origin" of the remedy (at [138]) or "fairy tales" constructed about it (at [69]) to depart from the fundamental equitable principle that a defaulting trustee should only be required to restore the trust fund to the position it would have been in had the breach not occurred (at [63]–[64] and [134]–[135]).... 
     In fairness to the critics of Target Holdings, it must be recognised that the dichotomy between adhering to the nature of the accounting process and limiting compensation to loss attributable to the breach is a false one. The Supreme Court could have achieved justice and common sense in the present case within the historical parameters of the accounting process. Nonetheless, it is submitted that there is something to be said for parting with the artificial steps of falsification where the court is making a direct award of equitable compensation.... Full text available for download on Westlaw.

Thursday, February 26, 2015

$1.1M in New Small Project Research Funding

Congratulations to the Faculty members who were awarded HKU Small Project Research Grants up to $80,000 each. The projects cover a wide range of topics and are listed as follows (in no particular order):
1. Competition Law Enforcement against Abuses of Market Power in Hong Kong (36 months), Kelvin Kwok
2. Fiduciary Obligations: Justifying and Limiting Loyalty (24 months), Rebecca Lee
3. Reforming Anti-Dilution Law in China (24 months), Haochen Sun
4. Path Dependence and Interconnected Institutions: Implications for Legal Transplantation (24 months), Guanghua Yu
5. Implications of the New Round of Legal and Market Reform in China (30 months), Xian Chu Zhang
6. Eastern Values in International Arbitration: An Initial Exploration (36 months), Shahla Ali
7. Exercise of Legislative Power by the Executive (36 months), Jianlin Chen
8. A Comparative Legal Study on Tackling Cyberbullying and Protecting Children's Rights (24 months), Anne Cheung
9. Financial Planning for Mental Incapacity: A Tale of Two Confucian Cities (24 months), Lusina Ho
10. Survey of Public Opinion Toward Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People in Hong Kong (24 months), Kelley Loper
11. Minority Shareholder Remedes in Hong Kong: Evolving Dispute Resolution Approaches (24 months), Katherine Lynch
12. The Interrelation between Case Law and Legislation in Aspects of Commercial Law (36 months), Ji Lian Yap
13. A statistical study of Constitutional and Administrative Law judgments from 1997 - 2012 (24 months), Antonio Da Roza
14. The Tightening of Transparency Requirements in the International Tax Regime and its Impact on Mainland China and Hong Kong (15 months), Doreen Qiu
15. Freedom of information and privacy protection in China: resolving conflicts and promoting accountability (18 months), Clement Chen
16. The Delicate Art of Med-Arb and Its Future Institutionalisation in China (18 months), Weixia Gu.

Sunday, December 14, 2014

New Issue of Hong Kong Law Journal (Part 3 of 2014)


Vol. 44, Part 3 of 2014

Table of Contents


Comment 
Realising Universal Suffrage in Hong Kong After the Standing Committee’s Decision  Simon NM Young  689 



Analysis
Gross Negligence Manslaughter After Lai Shui Yin  John Adams Leung and Hin Ting Liu  709 
Business Review in Directors’ Report: New Companies Ordinance Requirement  Stella So, Janet Kwan and Annie Ko  719 
Disclosure of Price Sensitive Information – The Peculiar Case of the MTR Corporation  Chee Keong Low and Tak Hay Low  735 

Lectures 
When Will the Court Grant Relief for Trustees’ Mistakes? Pitt v Holt and Futter v Futter  Robert Walker  759 
The Strengths of the Common Law  William Gummow  773 
Institutional Integrity and Public Law: An Address to the Judges of Hong Kong  James Spigelman  779 

Articles
Financial Planning for Mental Incapacity: Antiquated Law in a Modern Financial Centre  Lusina Ho  795 
Storm in a Milk Bottle: WTO Consistency of Hong Kong’s Export Barrier on Powdered Formula  Kelly Kuan Shang  809 

China Law 
Land Registration, Property Rights and Institutional Performance in China: Progress Achieved and Challenges Ahead  Lei Chen  841 
The Perpetual Dance: Interpreting “One Country, Two Systems” Through the Lens of Tongbian Dialectics  Jason Buhi  865 
The Logic (or Illogic) of China’s Local Government Debts Out of Control – Law, Governance or other Perspectives  Shen Wei  887 
Recidivist Thieves and Amnesties in Qing Law  Geoffrey MacCormack  917 

Book Reviews 
Introduction to the Hong Kong Basic Law, Danny Gittings, I Grenville Cross SC  961 
Practising Self-Government: A Comparative Study of Autonomous Regions, Yash Ghai and Sophia Woodman (eds), Shucheng Wang  965 
Comparative Perspectives on Criminal Justice in China, McConville M and Pils E (eds), Na Jiang  969

Click here to read the abstracts.