Shilun Zhou on Whether chatbot-generated opinion can be trusted (International Journal of Evidence and Proof)

"Whether chatbot-generated opinion can be trusted: Application of the hearsay rule of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and inspiration for China's evidence law reform"
Shilun Zhou (PhD Candidate)
International Journal of Evidence and Proof
Published online: December 2025

Abstract: As part of its criminal justice reform, the UK Ministry of Justice issued a policy paper on the use of software-generated evidence in criminal proceedings. In response, this article consistently uses the term “chatbot-generated opinion,” while employing “chatbot testimony” metaphorically to compare chatbot responses in court to human testimony given in answer to a judge's questions. The article explores whether chatbot-generated opinion evidence can be trusted, focusing on the hearsay rule under the UK Criminal Justice Act 2003 and its implications for reforming China's evidence law. Contrary to prevailing views that exclude such evidence due to the lack of cross-examination, the article argues that chatbot opinions should not be directly accepted as testimony. It further explains that virtue jurisprudence offers an appropriate framework for identifying indicators of justified belief. Since a chatbot is incapable of having a moral motivation, this prevents judges from justifiably believing a chatbot's statement qua testimony. Introducing such an evidence analysis approach in China is significant. China's Confucian ethics and virtue jurisprudence highlight moral responsibility and motivation, providing a valuable foundation for the ongoing reform of China's evidence law and overcoming the limitations of its predominant objectivist approach to proof.

Shilun Zhou on Deconstructing ‘Responsible AI’: An Examination of Legal and Ethical Accountability Through Virtue Jurisprudence (Int J Semiot Law)

"Deconstructing ‘Responsible AI’: An Examination of Legal and Ethical Accountability Through Virtue Jurisprudence"
Shilun Zhou (PhD Candidate)
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law
Published online: November 2025

Abstract: This article deconstructs the legal semiotic of “Responsible AI” through the lens of virtue jurisprudence, addressing ethical dilemmas in technology-driven knowledge creation within the humanities. It critiques the misleading anthropomorphisation of AI, arguing that “Responsible AI” should be understood as “responsible in name only” and “accountable in reality”. By distinguishing between moral agency and legal accountability, it highlights AI’s dual legal attributes, including its anthropomorphic intelligent dimension and its distinct artificial nature. While the terms of reliability and AI could be semantically related at first glance, the virtue jurisprudence approach could distinguish the semiotic implications of “responsible AI” and “accountable AI”, by highlighting humans’ unique moral assessment capacity, which AI lacks, making AI accountable but not responsible. Emphasising such moral capacity not only justifies human’s refusal to be treated like machines but also provides a theoretical basis for a human-centred AI framework and guides the development of accountability AI in current legal practice. By examining the interplay between human virtue and technological systems, it calls for a renewed focus on human-centric ethical principles in the age of AI-driven knowledge production.

Douglas Arner et al on Datafying sustainable finance: Efficiency and impact by design (European Law Journal)

"Datafying sustainable finance: Efficiency and impact by design"
Dirk A. Zetzsche, Marian Unterstell, Ross P. Buckley, Douglas W. Arner
European Law Journal, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp. 203-226
Published online: November 2025

Abstract: The ongoing implementation of the EU's Sustainable Finance Strategy has led to a significant development of EU law to finance and facilitate the transition of the real economy towards sustainability. We argue first that this strategy, at its core, is a data strategy, requiring the datafication of the entire European financial, production and services sectors. The ongoing process of datafication will extend to data concerning externalities previously not incorporated into quantitative financial models and analysis. Second, we look at other datafication processes in finance to identify regulatory lessons for the EU's Sustainable Finance Framework in light of the European Commission's Simplification and Burden Reduction agenda in finance. We recommend the implementation of digital reporting standards developed in tandem by industry and regulators; the utilisation of Green RegTech and SupTech, centralised and enabled via digital reporting infrastructure; and the facilitation of the use of official estimates to both ensure proportionality and reduce the regulatory burden of reporting entities, with a focus on small and medium enterprises.

Xin He and Huina Xiao on Women and Divorce: Institutional Constraints and Outcomes, and Possible Ways Forward (New Book Chapter)

"Women and Divorce: Institutional Constraints and Outcomes, and Possible Ways Forward"
Xin He and Huina Xiao
in Gordana Malešević (ed), Challenges for Chinese Women in the Early Twenty-First Century (World Scientific, November 2025), Chapter 9, pp. 159-175
Published online: November 2025

Abstract: The following sections are included in this chapter: Introduction, Institutional Constraints of Judicial Decision-Making in Divorce Disputes, Gendered Judicial Practices in Divorce Disputes, Gendered Lawyering, Conclusion, References, Statutes Cited

Edward Lui on Why Consult? The Case of Public Consultation in Hong Kong Administrative Law (AsJCL)

"Why Consult? The Case of Public Consultation in Hong Kong Administrative Law"
Edward Lui
Asian Journal of Comparative Law
Published online: November 2025

Abstract: This article investigates the law of public consultation in Hong Kong administrative law. The Hong Kong cases in this area have consistently followed, without question, the corresponding English authorities, and seem to have simply assumed the appropriacy of this approach. But given that it seems open to academic argument whether the Hong Kong legal system shares the same liberal democratic political theory which the English legal system endorses – and given that the English law of public consultation is commonly regarded as, inter alia, pursuing a liberal democracy-based rationale – two questions arise: (i) what is, or what are, the underlying rationale(s) for the Hong Kong law of public consultation; and (ii) to what extent is it appropriate for the Hong Kong courts to adopt the English case law on public consultation? This article contends that even assuming the Hong Kong legal system is not underpinned by a liberal democratic political theory, (i) the Hong Kong law of public consultation is underpinned by the informational rationale and a specific strand of the respect rationale; and (ii) English case law on public consultation can be implemented into Hong Kong law, insofar as its reasoning can be completed without affirming a liberal democratic premise.

Congratulations to Puja Kapai honoured as one of “Women of Power” 2025

Congratulations to Professor Puja Kapai Paryani, who are honoured as one of “Women of Power” 2025. The Scheme is an initiative by Prestige magazine that identifies, celebrates, and builds a community of influential women in various fields across Asia, such as Hong Kong, Singapore, and Malaysia. It aims to inspire other women, particularly the next generation, through summits and annual lists, and foster a supportive network where members can collaborate and create positive social impact.

This is not the first time Puja is recognized; her commitment to pluralism and equity earned her the International Women of Courage Award in 2015 and the 2021 Global Pluralism Award. And we are proud that her pioneering work in human rights, inclusion, diversity and social justice, is well acknowledged and appreciated.

Congratulations to Benjamin Chen, Gallant Ho Outstanding Young Professorship

Congratulations to Professor Benjamin Chen who has been conferred the Gallant Ho Outstanding Young Professorship.

The “Outstanding Young Professorships Scheme” represents the University’s commitment to nurturing rising stars and young talents. An Outstanding Young Professorship will be awarded to an Assistant Professor or Associate Professor.

Professor Chen is an interdisciplinary scholar whose research is situated at the intersection of law and social sciences. He is a prolific scholar and a rising star in his field. 

Let us take this moment to congratulate Professor Chen on this well-deserved achievement.

Congratulations to Xin He, Chair Professor

Congratulations to Professor Xin He on his recent conferral of the title Chair Professor at The University of Hong Kong.  The title is a mark of distinction as the President wrote in his conferment letter to Professor He:

"At this University, a Chair Professor title is reserved for world-class scholars of distinction. It signifies due recognition of outstanding academic leadership and excellence. As a top-rated researcher and academic leader, you are held in high regard by your peers globally, and your significant contributions and accomplishments have received international acclaim."

Professor He is now only one of four Chair Professors in the Faculty of Law.  He was appointed to the Mok Sau-King Professorship in Law at the University of Hong Kong in 2024 and his latest monograph The Judicial System of China was published by Oxford University Press in November 2024.  For more information on Professor He's research outputs and impact, click here.

Congratulations to Professor Hui Jing!

Congratulations to Prof. Hui Jing on his promotion to Associate Professor! Prof. Jing is a prolific researcher with an excellent publication record. He is a rare scholar of comparative trust law who can effectively cover both the Chinese and common law jurisdictions. He is one of the few experts worldwide capable of engaging deeply with both legal traditions. Prof. Jing is a valuable member of our Faculty, and this promotion is a well-deserved recognition of his contributions. To read more about Prof. Jing's research and publications, click here.

Daisy Cheung and Trevor Wan on Hong Kong’s failed attempt at criminalising commercial surrogacy: Tale of a flawed legislative transplant (Medical Law International)

"Hong Kong’s failed attempt at criminalising commercial surrogacy: Tale of a flawed legislative transplant"
Daisy Cheung and Trevor Wan
Medical Law International
Published online: December 2025

Abstract: The article examines the failure of section 17 of Hong Kong’s Human Reproductive Technology Ordinance (Cap. 561) to criminalise commercial surrogacy, despite clear legislative intent to that effect. Through an in-depth analysis of the legislative debates and a series of illustrative vignettes, it demonstrates that section 17 only renders unlawful the act of making or receiving payments for negotiations leading to a commercial surrogacy arrangement, rather than the act of entering into such an arrangement itself. Such predicament stems from a flawed process of legislative transplantation. Section 17 was modelled on section 2(1) of the United Kingdom’s Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985, the primary aim of which was to combat the proliferation of intermediary surrogacy agencies, instead of outlawing the practice of commercial surrogacy itself. Incomplete understanding of this legislative context likely led the drafters to misjudge the Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985 as a suitable model for transplantation into the Hong Kong context. The article underscores the importance of careful legislative transplantation, and how crucial it is that law drafters and legislators be attuned to the original intent, domestic policy, and socio-legal context of the foreign rule being considered.

Craig Purshouse on Reconceiving Tort Liability for “Wrongful Life” (The Cambridge Law Journal)

"Reconceiving Tort Liability for “Wrongful Life”"
Craig Purshouse
The Cambridge Law Journal
Published online: December 2025

Abstract: It is widely assumed that English law adopts a restrictive approach towards tort actions for “wrongful life”. This article reveals the true legal position to be much more complex. A broad distinction exists between cases where the wrong occurred before or at conception and those where it occurred during pregnancy, with claims usually being permitted in the former scenario but not in the latter. In this article, I expose this bifurcation as arbitrary before examining potential solutions for remedying it.

Alex Huang on Bankruptcy Law's doctrinal evolution: An empirical study (ABLJ)

"Bankruptcy Law's doctrinal evolution: An empirical study"
Alex Huang
American Business Law Journal, Volume 62, Issue 4, pp. 289 - 312
Published online: October 2025

Abstract: Despite the stability of the formal Bankruptcy Code, an influential literature suggests a paradigm shift from debtor control to lender control in the actual processing of Chapter 11 cases. Yet, while existing studies highlight who now benefits more from case outcomes, how the doctrinal case content has evolved amidst this paradigm shift remains unexplored. To address this gap, I examine the doctrinal evolution of Chapter 11 cases through citation practices. In bankruptcy law, judges are required to cite sections and co-cite doctrinally related code sections to justify their decisions, similar to how precedents are co-cited. The citation practices enable a systematic examination of corporate reorganization law using information from 6439 bankruptcy opinions, revealing a shift toward a closer relationship between operational and distributional sections. These two types of sections govern critical bankruptcy decisions: operational sections oversee firm activities related to asset deployment and securing financing, while distributional sections regulate decisions concerning creditors' priority and payoffs. Both individual section co-citation analysis and the global examination based on community detection and text analysis demonstrate that these two categories of sections have transitioned from being infrequently co-cited to being frequently co-cited. This article explains the strengthened co-citation relationship between operational and distributional sections as a result of a shift in business transaction structures. In modern bankruptcy, distributional decisions are increasingly made simultaneously with operational decisions—the bundling structure, rather than the traditional unbundled structure. This bundling serves as the mechanism through which lender control is exercised as it sidesteps the priority rule in favor of certain senior lenders. As judges oversee more bundled transactions, sections of different types, implicitly or explicitly, are co-cited more frequently. This study systematically identifies the doctrinal shift from unbundling to bundling for the first time. By linking case content to outcomes, this study enhances our understanding of the bankruptcy law paradigm shift. Furthermore, this network approach to addressing the inconsistency between judicial practice and formal law holds potential in other fields.

HKU–ALSA Young Scholars Conference Successfully Held at the University of Hong Kong

The HKU–ALSA Young Scholars Conference was successfully held at the University of Hong Kong from December 5 to 6, 2025. The two-day conference brought together early-career scholars and senior academics from diverse jurisdictions to engage in in-depth discussions on emerging frontiers in legal research. As the second installment of the ALSA Young Scholars Conference series, following its inaugural meeting at Singapore Management University in 2024, the conference reaffirmed the series’ longstanding commitment to supporting and advancing early-career scholarship.

At the core of the conference were presentations by twelve early-career scholars, whose papers were rigorously selected by the organizing committee from more than 130 submissions spanning five continents. The participating scholars represented leading institutions, including Tsinghua University, the University of Hong Kong, the University of Macau, the National University of Singapore, the University of Cambridge, and the Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná in Brazil. Their research addressed a wide range of jurisdictions, including China, the United States, Europe, Southeast Asia, and South America. The organizing committee comprised Dr. Zhicheng Huang, Global Academic Fellow at the Faculty of Law, University of Hong Kong; Professor Akshaya Kamalnath of the Australian National University; and Professor Amnart Tangkiriphimarn of Thammasat University.

The conference opened with welcoming remarks by Professor Fu Hualing, Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Hong Kong, and Professor Tan Cheng Han, President of the Asian Law Schools Association and Professor at the National University of Singapore. This was followed by a leadership roundtable on Asian Legal Education, which brought together four law school deans, including Dean Fu Hualing; Professor Tan Cheng Han, former Dean of the law schools at the National University of Singapore and City University of Hong Kong; and Professor Sida Liu, Associate Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Hong Kong. The roundtable explored how Asian law schools can balance localization and internationalization, and how legal education should respond proactively to the challenges posed by artificial intelligence to both the legal profession and curriculum design.

Over the course of the conference, four thematic sessions focused on Empirical Legal Studies, AI and Law, Commercial Law, and Data and Information. Each session provided a supportive and intellectually rigorous setting for sustained exchange between early-career scholars and senior academics. The twelve presenters engaged in close and dynamic dialogue with their discussants, benefiting from detailed and constructive feedback on their research.

In the Commercial Law session, Dr. Guo Shuai, Associate Professor at China University of Political Science and Law, introduced his original comparative law concept of Interadaptationism and, building on this framework, examined the role of the Global South in reshaping the future of bankruptcy law. He noted that the conference was thoughtfully designed and particularly effective in fostering a scholarly community that encouraged deep engagement among early-career researchers from diverse disciplinary backgrounds.

Professor Cheng Jin-Hua of Shanghai Jiao Tong University served as a discussant in the Data and Information session, where he commended the overall quality of the selected papers and expressed his hope for closer collaboration between universities in mainland China and Hong Kong in the training of young scholars. Professor Wang Jiangyu of City University of Hong Kong acted as a discussant in the AI and Law session, emphasizing that mentoring early-career scholars is a core responsibility of senior academics and highlighting the unique value of young scholars conferences as platforms for sustained academic support.

In addition to the thematic sessions, three keynote addresses collectively outlined a clear pathway for scholarly development. Professor Benjamin Chen of the University of Hong Kong spoke on interdisciplinary research, illustrating how law and economics and empirical methods can be mobilized to address complex legal problems. Professor Wang Jiangyu, drawing on his experience as editor-in-chief of two leading academic journals, offered guidance from an editor’s perspective and underscored the importance of clearly articulating a paper’s original scholarly contribution. Professor Douglas Arner of the University of Hong Kong focused on impactful legal research, arguing that impact should be understood not merely as an ex post assessment, but as an ex ante research orientation that guides scholars in framing research questions and selecting materials.

In the closing remarks, the organizing team expressed its sincere appreciation to all speakers, discussants, and administrative colleagues for their dedication to academic mentorship and careful engagement with the presented work. The team also expressed its hope that future editions of the Young Scholars Conference will continue to provide sustained and meaningful support for the academic development of early-career scholars.

David Winterton on Examining Mitigation in the Law of Damages and the Limits of the Compensatory Principle (Oxford Journal of Legal Studies)

"Examining Mitigation in the Law of Damages and the Limits of the Compensatory Principle"
David Winterton
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies
Published online: December 2025

Abstract: In Causation in the Law, Hart and Honoré famously argued that the attribution of responsibility for outcomes within the law is broadly consistent with the ordinary person’s non-legal judgments about responsibility, whilst simultaneously drawing an important distinction between ‘causal’ and non-causal’ rules of responsibility attribution. In Mitigation in the Law of Damages, Andrew Summers argues that the theory of ‘common-sense causation’ Hart and Honoré advanced also persuasively explains the English law of mitigation. In addition to considering the continuing relevance of this analysis today, and noting the need for an improved understanding of legal responsibility’s non-causal limits, the present article critically evaluates Summers’s descriptive claims. It is argued that while Summers offers a generally compelling rationalisation of the avoidable loss rule, his analysis of the authorities concerned with the relevance of consequential benefits derived from the wrong when assessing damages following civil wrongdoing is substantively incomplete.

When Privacy Is Threatened (Angus Young Profiled in HKU Bulletin)

"When Privacy Is Threatened"
Angus Young
HKU Bulletin
Published in November 2025

Breaches of privacy in the digital age can open the door to cybercrimes. Dr Angus Young of the Faculty of Law considers the legal implications.

The prospect of having one’s personal information taken and used without consent has become an ever more urgent problem. Prior to the proliferation of computers, and later digital networks, such information could only be accessed in physical form. Now, with an internet connection and some savvy software, almost anyone can obtain personal, identifying details about someone from anywhere in the world.

“The harm of having little to no privacy is that one loses one’s individuality, on the one hand. But on the other hand, it actually makes cybercrimes, such as scams and fraud, much easier,” said Dr Angus Young, Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Law, who teaches postgraduate students about privacy and the law.

Modern technology enables criminals to scrape personal information, such as photos or videos, from social media and other sources and use them to create deep fakes. In early 2024, for instance, a finance worker in a multinational firm in Hong Kong was tricked into believing they were on a video conference call with a senior member of the firm; the worker transferred HK$200 million to the fraudster.

“Thousands of people are losing money over scams all over the world. We are not talking about uneducated or particularly vulnerable people – professionals are affected, too. A lot of this starts with the loss of privacy,” Dr Young said.

Way behind

Unfortunately, laws to protect privacy are uneven across the world...

Click here to read the full text.

Cora Chan on Law and Authoritarian Transition: Anatomy of Hong Kong’s Post-2019 Constitutional Order (Les Éditions Thémis)

"7th Chevrette-Marx Lectures The Chevrette-Marx Lectures 2025 Law and Authoritarian Transition: Anatomy of Hong Kong's Post-2019 Constitutional Order"

Cora Chan

Les Éditions Thémis

Published in September 2025

Description: In the years since the 2019 protest movement in Hong Kong, China has sought to securitise the territory using numerous legal tools. Through a dissection of Hong Kong's post-2019 constitutional developments, this lecture examines how the prerogative and normative domains of Ernst Fraenkel's “dual state” legal order can interact in ways that both facilitate and impede authoritarianism. In doing so, the lecture not only reveals the varied character of legality in today's Hong Kong; it also illuminates the paradoxical roles played by law in authoritarian transitions. These insights are particularly relevant at a time of global crisis for liberal constitutionalism.

Trevor Wan on Globetrotting Advocates: Foreign Barristers in Hong Kong Courts (AJCL)

"Globetrotting Advocates: Foreign Barristers in Hong Kong Courts"
Trevor Wan
The American Journal of Comparative Law
Published Online: November 2025

Abstract: Foreign barristers, typically King’s Counsel from the United Kingdom, can apply for admission on an ad hoc basis to argue cases before the Hong Kong courts. This Article presents a comprehensive account of this regime of ad hoc admissions, which has not yet been systematically examined by scholars. Building upon, and simultaneously challenging, the theory of market control in the sociology of the legal profession, this Article conceptualizes the system as initially an equilibrium between market demand for high-caliber legal services and market control by the local Bar. The transfer of sovereignty in 1997 prompted a shift in the underlying logic of the regime away from market control to politics. Under the new Chinese Special Administrative Region, the regime became integral to preserving Hong Kong’s global standing. A bundle of political factors, tied to the notion of “foreignness,” began to dictate its trajectory. Furthermore, this Article offers an empirical panorama of ad hoc admissions, documenting the trends and patterns over time, profiles of the foreign barristers, types of cases for which they were engaged, clients involved, and reasons for opposing individual admission applications by the Hong Kong Bar Association, Secretary for Justice, and the Court of First Instance. Last but not least, this Article assesses the ongoing criticisms, politicization, and securitization of the regime, while probing its future in light of changes in the underlying political incentive structure.

Brian Tang spoke at the seminar "Legal AI: Ethics, Opportunities & Risks" organized by the Law Society of Hong Kong's Practice Management Committee

Pictured (from left to right): Mr. Simon Chan, Mr. Brian Tang, and Mr. Alan Chiu 

On 18 November 2025, the Law Society of Hong Kong's Practice Management Committee, hosted the seminar "Legal AI: Ethics, Opportunities & Risks" which brought together Hong Kong law firm leaders to explore how AI is transforming the way lawyers work, and also the ethical, operational, and professional considerations that come with it. Mr. Brian Tang, the Executive Director of Law, Innovation, Technology & Entrepreneurship Lab (LITE Lab@HKU), has been invited to speak at this eminent event.

The seminar featured the managing and senior partners of prominent Hong Kong and international law firms Gallant, EllaLAN and Dorsey & Whitney and discussed the emerging trends, practical challenges, and how law firms can responsibly integrate AI into their practices. It also provided the opportunity to experience the latest advancements in Legal AI technology through live demonstrations and free trial sessions by Microsoft, Thomson Reuters and Lawplus, showcasing how innovative AI tools are being applied in real-world legal settings.

Brian shared how AI is changing the technological and market landscape for skillsets and mindsets required of lawyers to thrive, and highlighted the duty of practice supervision and management that partners had over their human staff lawyers using AI and the growing number of AI agents. For more details, click here to view Brian's LinkedIn post.

For the coming Hong Kong Legal Week 2025, Brian will also speak at the Hong Kong LawTech Fest on 5 December 2025 for the topic "Lawyers & AI - the evolving roles and skillsets for success". Interested parties can register to attend for free here: https://www.legalweek.hk/en/law-tech

Weilin Xiao awarded the Hessel Yntema Prize 2025

Congratulations to Weilin Xiao, whose article “Expansion and Restriction: Divergent Paths Towards Modernizing Family Law in China and Japan, 1868-1930” was awarded the Hessel Yntema Prize 2025 by the American Society of Comparative Law. This article forms the first part of Weilin's doctoral dissertation, which he is currently developing into a book manuscript

Background on the prize: Established in 1991 to honor the first editor in chief of the American Journal of Comparative Law, the Hessel Yntema prize of $1,500 recognizes the “most outstanding” article by a younger scholar under 40 years of age published in a recent volume of the Journal. Please click here for more details regarding the prize.

Yuxia Zhang and John Liu on The Rise of the Chinese Judiciary and Its Limits: Administrative Litigation in the Reform Period (The China Quarterly)

"The Rise of the Chinese Judiciary and Its Limits: Administrative Litigation in the Reform Period"

Yuxia Zhang (PhD Candidate) and John Liu
The China Quarterly
Published Online: May 2025

Abstract: This article analyses the performance of the Chinese judiciary in administrative ligation during the recent period of reform using a dataset of over 1.6 million judicial documents. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we find compelling evidence that the judiciary has become increasingly significant in checking the power of the government. Courts accepted 79 per cent more cases from 2014 to 2020, and plaintiffs’ win rate against the government rose from 33.2 per cent to 42.2 per cent. This increase is even more pronounced in cases with a strong impact on local government, such as those reviewing land expropriations and police penalties. Judicial authority has improved, with chief government officials attending more than 50 per cent of trials as defendants. Our findings illustrate a judiciary that is on the rise, but there are fundamental limits to its ascent. Courts remain silent on citizens’ political rights. Judges are reluctant to conduct substantive reviews of government actions beyond procedural matters. These findings support a tripartite theory for understanding the rule of law in China, where the law and the judiciary are instrumental in routine and even hard cases, but their power rapidly wanes in the face of politics.