Yuyao Yi (PhD Candidate)
Law & Social Inquiry
Published online: 7 August 2026
Follow the research activities and scholarship of the Faculty of Law, The University of Hong Kong
Abstract: Interim constitutions have become increasingly prevalent in modern constitution-making, yet they have received comparatively limited scholarly attention. While they are defined by their “interim” nature, the meaning of this designation remains conceptually and empirically unclear, with existing scholarship often treating it as self-evident. This article addresses that gap through an original empirical study of forty-one interim constitutions adopted between 1990 and January 2025, examining how long these instruments remain in force, the factors that shape their duration, and the implications of their endurance for the constitution-making processes they are meant to facilitate. Conceptually, the article identifies four key roles interim constitutions play within constitution-making processes: (i) procedural frameworks; (ii) training wheels; (iii) first drafts; and (iv) last resorts. Empirically, the article challenges the assumption that interim constitutions are inherently short-lived, finding that two-thirds of the interim constitutions surveyed exceeded their deadlines for replacement, while almost one-fifth remained in place for over a decade. The study finds that the inclusion of explicit deadlines does not correlate with shorter interim periods, while conflict intensity during the interim period emerges as a statistically significant predictor of longevity. Given that written constitutions intended to be permanent have an average lifespan of only nineteen years, can a constitution labeled “interim” still be considered as such if it remains in force for just as long, or even longer? The article proposes a typology of constitutions based on their temporality, distinguishing between interim, permanent, failed, and accidental constitutions, and explores the implications of accidental constitutional endurance for the design of interim constitutional processes as procedural frameworks, training wheels, first drafts, or last resorts.
"Extraterritorial Arbitration For Domestic Disputes In China- Liberalization In The Greater Bay Area As A Prelude To The Process Of Legal Convergence"
Yun Zhao and Yating Lin (PhD 2026)
The Boston University International Law Journal, Vol 43, Spring 2025
Published online: 2025
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Book description: This book explores the emerging development of community-investor dispute prevention and facilitation mechanisms employed by multilateral and national development banks in the Asia Pacific region. In the decades since the development of the first accountability mechanisms were introduced, much has been learned about public consultation, community engagement and dispute prevention during the early stages of major infrastructure development programs. Drawing on case studies, project statistics and survey data, this book explores the achievements, challenges and lessons learned in community-investor dispute prevention and resolution in infrastructure projects in 12 states in the Asia Pacific region. Given the widescale impact of such projects, understanding how to advance consultation practices with local communities is necessary to realize the benefits of sustainable growth. This book allows readers to understand that localized decision-making channels, far from aggregating disputes, conversely provide a conduit to incorporate joint aspirations into project design such that disputes are avoided.
"Harassment as a Common Law Tort and the Limits of Corporate Standing"
Anfield Tam (PCLL graduate)
Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
Published online: August 2026
Abstract: The rapid expansion of digital asset markets has transformed commercial exchange while exposing structural tensions between private dispute resolution and mandatory public regulation. As English law has evolved to recognize cryptoassets as property, disputes concerning ownership, fraud, platform governance, and regulatory compliance have proliferated, with arbitration emerging as a preferred mechanism for their resolution. However, the deployment of arbitration in consumer-facing digital asset markets raises difficult questions about the limits of party autonomy where statutory rights and public policy are engaged.
This article critically examines those limits through a close analysis of Payward, Inc. d/ b/a Kraken, Payward Ventures, Inc. & Payward Ltd v. Chechetkin, situating the decision within the broader framework of the Arbitration Act 1996 (as amended in 2025) and the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958). It argues that Payward reveals three interrelated constraints on arbitral autonomy: the non-derogable character of statutory consumer protection, the principled operation of public policy at the enforcement stage, and the heightened scrutiny applied to standard-form arbitration clauses in cross-border digital transactions. Far from signalling hostility to arbitration, the decision reflects a recalibration of arbitral autonomy in regulatory contexts. The article concludes that, in an increasingly mature and regulated digital asset market, arbitration remains viable only to the extent that it operates consistently with mandatory consumer and financial regulatory norms.
Summary: This Element examines the legal infrastructure required to address the intertwined health and environmental crises of the Anthropocene. It introduces planetary health law as an emerging transdisciplinary paradigm that integrates global health law and international environmental law to tackle the impacts of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution on humanity and the broader biosphere. The Element highlights the shortcomings of current frameworks, which remain largely voluntary and anthropocentric. It makes the case for a comprehensive planetary health law framework that recognizes both the human right to a healthy planet and the planetary right to health. This integrated approach would catalyze systemic institutional reform. Key proposals include the creation of a Planetary Health Organization to coordinate the work of the World Health Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, alongside a Planetary Health Tribunal to enforce Nature-oriented norms and accountability. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
Abstract: This paper critically examines Hong Kong’s continuous contract requirement under the Employment Ordinance (Cap 57), which conditions eligibility for employment benefits and protections on meeting prescribed minimum hours over a four-week period. This threshold, known as the 4–18 Rule, requires at least 18 hours of work per week for the same employer over four consecutive weeks. In June 2025, the Legislative Council enacted the Employment (Amendment) Ordinance 2025, which replaced the 4–18 Rule with a dual threshold from 18 January 2026. Under the amendment, employees may qualify as being continuously employed by either working 17 hours of work per week over consecutive four weeks or a cumulative total of 68 hours within the same period (the 4–17–68 Rule). Drawing on qualitative legal analysis and empirical data, this paper argues that the 4–18 Rule creates a situation of employment precarity, disproportionately affects women, and facilitates employer-driven scheduling strategies that exclude workers from key statutory protections and benefits. Judicial interpretation remains constrained, with courts unable to remedy employer avoidance in the absence of statutory reform. This paper further argues that the 4–17–68 Rule reform constitutes only a numerical adjustment and fails to address the structural, legal, and institutional roots of exclusion that characterise the 4–18 Rule. Drawing on international models, particularly from Singapore, Australia, and the UK, the paper advocates for substantive legislative amendments, including anti-avoidance provisions and a proportional entitlement system. Without these, the revised 4–17–68 Rule will preserve, rather than remedy, systemic precarity and gender inequality in statutory employment benefits and protections.
Abstract: The rise of targeted advertising, powered by algorithmic technologies and extensive personal data collection, has significantly transformed the digital landscape. While such practices generate considerable economic benefits, they also pose critical risks to the protection of personal information. The informed consent model, derived initially from medical ethics and integrated into contemporary data protection laws, aims to safeguard individuals’ informational self-determination by ensuring transparency, voluntariness, and genuine user control. This article critically examines the implementation of the informed consent framework in different jurisdictions and an empirical audit of privacy policies from 25 prominent Chinese platforms. The research identifies substantial gaps between regulatory ambitions and actual practices, including the erosion of users’ right to be informed, systemic distortion of consent through manipulative interfaces, and impeded withdrawal mechanisms. To bridge these gaps, this article proposes targeted reforms emphasising user-centric transparency, rigorous consent standards, and accessible withdrawal mechanisms. The findings underscore the necessity of shifting from formal compliance to substantive user empowerment to achieve meaningful personal information protection.
Yu is a tenure-track Assistant Professor of Data, AI & Law at the University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law and School of Computing and Data Science. He is also a PhD candidate in Legal AI at ETH Zurich and an associated researcher at the ETH AI Center. His research lies at the intersection of law, computational social science, machine learning, natural language processing, and data science. His work has been published at leading AI and NLP venues, including the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), and Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL). Yu holds a Master of Arts in Sociology from Freie Universität Berlin, with a focus on computational social science; a Professional Certificate in Artificial Intelligence from Stanford University; and a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy and Sociology from Universität Bielefeld, with a focus on theoretical philosophy.
Research Areas:
Xiangyi received her Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Chicago, an MSc in Politics of China from SOAS University of London, and a B.A. in Political Science and International Studies from the University of Wisconsin–Madison. She was awarded the 2025 Surrency Prize by the American Society for Legal History. Her work has appeared in the Journal of Contemporary China, Law and History Review, and China Law and Society Review. Prior to joining the University of Hong Kong as a Global Academic Fellow, she served as a Social Sciences Teaching Fellow at the University of Chicago.