New Book by Wilson Lui and Anselmo Reyes: Hong Kong Private International Law

Hong Kong Private International Law
Wilson Lui (Pre-Doctoral Fellow 2022–23), Anselmo Reyes
Hart Publishing
Published in March 2025
488 pp.

Description: This book is a one-stop reference to Hong Kong private international law.

It provides clear expositions on questions of jurisdiction, choice of law, recognition and enforcement, transnational arbitration, and inter-regional and international harmonisation of Hong Kong conflict of laws. It covers a range of areas, including the law of obligations at common law and in equity, the law of real and personal property, intellectual property law, family law, company law, insolvency and bankruptcy law, competition law, and admiralty law. It includes discussions of cross-border dispute resolution, jurisdiction and choice of law clauses.

The book focuses on the practical issues, emphasising the rapidly developing local jurisprudence of recent years. It also offers theoretical insights and suggestions for law reform when appropriate. Moreover, it systematically analyses conflict of laws issues arising out of inter-regional cases between Hong Kong on the one hand and Mainland China, Taiwan, and Macao on the other.

The book will be indispensable to judges, practitioners, scholars, and students in Hong Kong, Greater China, Asia, and worldwide.

A book launch will be held by the Asian Institute of International Financial Law (AIIFL) at HKU Law on Tuesday 29 April 2025. Details and registration are available here.

New Book edited by Anselmo Reyes and Wilson Lui et al: Choice of Law and Recognition in Asian Family Law (Hart Publishing)

Choice of Law and Recognition in Asian Family Law

Edited by Anselmo Reyes, Wilson Lui (Pre-Doctoral Fellow) and Kazuaki Nishioka

Hart Publishing

Published in October 2023

512 pp.

Book Description: This thematic volume in the series Studies in Private International Law – Asia outlines the general choice of law and recognition rules relating to family matters of 15 Asian jurisdictions: Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Sri Lanka and India. The book examines pressing questions and proposes ways in which their systems may be reformed. A concluding chapter considers the extent to which Asian cross-border family law systems can and should be harmonised.

The book provides a comprehensive analysis of cross-border family law challenges, including child surrogacy, child abduction, the recognition of same-sex unions, the recovery of maintenance, and the regulation of intercountry adoption. These are among the matters now testing Asian institutions of private international law and acting as forces for their modernisation.

With contributions by leading Asian private international law experts, the book proposes necessary reforms for each of the jurisdictions analysed as well as for Asia as a whole.

Wilson also contributed to Chapter 3 (pp. 51–80) on “Hong Kong”.

Zhao Yun on The Singapore Mediation Convention: A version of the New York Convention for Mediation? (J of Private Int'l Law)

"The Singapore mediation convention: A version of the New York convention for mediation?"
Zhao Yun
Journal of Private International Law
Published on 20 January 2022

Abstract: Settlement agreements have traditionally been enforced as binding contracts under national rules, a situation considered less than ideal for the promotion of mediation. Drawing on the experience of the 1958 New York Convention on international arbitration, the 2019 Singapore Mediation Convention provides for the enforcement of settlement agreements in international commercial disputes. Based on its provisions and the characteristics and procedures of mediation, this article discusses the impact of the Singapore Mediation Convention on the promotion of mediation and its acceptance by the international community. It is argued that the achievements of the New York Convention do not necessarily promise the same success for the Singapore Mediation Convention.

New Book by Anselmo Reyes and Wilson Lui: Direct Jurisdiction: Asian Perspectives (Hart Publishing)

Direct Jurisdiction: Asian Perspectives

edited by Anselmo Reyes and Wilson Lui (BA&LLB 2019)
Hart Publishing

Publication Date: August 2021
440 pp

Description: The second thematic volume in the series Studies in Private International Law – Asia looks into direct jurisdiction, that is, the situations in which the courts of 15 key Asian jurisdictions (Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and India) are prepared to hear a case involving cross-border elements. For instance, where parties are habitually resident abroad and a dispute has only some, little or no connection with an Asian state, will the courts of that state accept jurisdiction and hear the case and (if so) on what conditions? More specifically, the book's chapters explore the circumstances in which different Asian states assume or decline jurisdiction not just in commercial matters, but also in other types of action (such as family, consumer and employment disputes).

     The Introduction defines terminology and identifies similarities in the approaches to direct jurisdiction taken by the 15 Asian jurisdictions in civil and commercial litigation. Taking its cue from this, the Conclusion assesses whether there should be a multilateral convention or soft law instrument articulating principles of direct jurisdiction for Asia. The Conclusion also discusses possible trajectories that Asian jurisdictions may be taking in respect of direct jurisdiction in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the political tensions currently besetting the world. The book suggests that enacting suitable rules of direct jurisdiction requires an Asian jurisidction to strike a delicate balance between affording certainty and protecting its nationals. At heart, direct jurisdiction involves sometimes difficult policy considerations and is not just about drawing up lists of jurisdictional grounds and exceptions to them.

Maisie Ooi on Re-enfranchising the Investor of Intermediated Securities (J of Private Int'l L)

"Re-enfranchising the investor of intermediated securities"
Maisie Ooi
Journal of Private International Law, 

April 2020, Vol 16, Issue 1, pp 69-111

Abstract: Efforts to devise a choice-of-law rule for intermediated securities in the last two decades have almost entirely been centred on issues of property and title. Intermediation of securities does not, however, give rise to issues of property alone, even as they are mostly represented as such. The Court of Appeal’s decision in Secure Capital SA v Credit Suisse AG (hereinafter referred to as “Secure Capital”) signals a possibly larger problem of the disenfranchisement of the investor of intermediated securities. Consideration of Secure Capital and its implications on choice-of-law have however been curiously sparse. This article seeks to bring the debate which still continues for issues of property to the issues of disenfranchisement, and to demonstrate why they are no less problematic, complex and in urgent need of a viable solution.

Interview with Yun Zhao, the New Representative of the Hague Conference on Private International Law Asia Pacific Regional Office

Congratulations to Professor Yun Zhao on his appointment as the Representative of the Asia Pacific Regional Office of the Hague Conference on Private International Law! The Faculty of Law's KE Unit is honoured to have the opportunity to interview Professor Zhao on his new role and the challenges ahead for private international law co-operation.

1. What is the Hague Conference on Private International Law?

The Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) is a global intergovernmental organization with the purpose to work for the progressive unification of the rules of private international law ranging from commercial law and banking law to international civil procedure and from child protection to matters of marriage and personal status. It also fosters international judicial and administrative cooperation in the area of private law, especially in the fields of protection of the family and children, of civil procedure and commercial law. It does so by developing multilateral treaties (HCCH Conventions) and other legal instruments. 

2. When was the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific opened in Hong Kong and what is its mission? 

The Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (ROAP), representing the HCCH in the Asia-Pacific Region, was opened in 2012 with the mission to act as a bridge to enhance communications and understanding between the Permanent Bureau of the HCCH in the Hague and States in the Asia-Pacific Region. The ROAP promotes the HCCH and the HCCH Conventions by conducting events, developing projects and a variety of activities across the Asia-Pacific Region. Our former colleague, Professor Anselmo Reyes was the representative of the ROAP from 2013 to 2017.

3. What are the duties of the Representative of the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific? 

The ROAP Representative shall promote the HCCH and its Conventions and build networks within the Asia Pacific Region; develop deeper understanding of the Hague Conventions and facilitate good practice and consistent implementation of these conventions; conduct or participate regional workshops, lectures, conferences, seminars or webinars; report on regional activities regularly to the Permanent Bureau. 

4. As the new Representative of the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, what do you hope to achieve in your term of appointment? 

I hope to strengthen the existing HCCH networks throughout the Asia Pacific Region and encourage non-member States in the region to join the HCCH and the Hague Conventions, enhance contacts with government officials, academic institutions and professional bodies in the region, and provide appropriate technical assistance to Member States in the Region.

Thank you Professor Zhao and all the best to you in your new role.

Maisie Ooi on Rethinking the Characterisation of Issues Relating to Securities (J of Private Int'l L)

"Rethinking the characterisation of issues relating to securities"

Maisie Ooi

Journal of Private International Law

Published online on 16 Dec 2019

Abstract: This article contends that there is a pressing need to rethink the characterisation of issues relating to securities, both complex and plain vanilla. It will demonstrate that the less than coherent choice-of-law process that exists for securities today is a consequence of courts utilising characterisation categories and rules that had not been designed with securities in mind and applying them in disregard of the new dimensions that securities and their transactions bring to characterisation. These have resulted in rules that do not provide certainty and predictability to participants in the securities and financial markets.

     The thesis that this article seeks to make is that a new characterisation category is required that is specific to securities which will encompass both directly held and intermediated securities (possibly also crypto-securities), and address issues of property, contract and corporations together. This will have its own choice-of-law rules which will be manifestations of the lex creationis, the law that created the relevant res or thing that is the subject-matter of the dispute. The convergence of issues traditionally dealt with by separate categories and rules will simplify and make for more coherent choice-of-law for securities.

Weixia Gu on the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters in China (new book chapter)

"China"
Weixia Gu
in Anselmo Reyes (ed.), Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Hart Publishing 2019)
Chapter 2, pp. 31-50

Introduction: The unparalleled economic growth of the People's Republic of China has resulted in a paradigm shift in its legal regime.  Once a closed market to the world, China now faces an unprecedented surge of international business and movement of global capital into its domestic market in light of its immense economic growth in the past 40 years.  As a result of this growth, the internationalism of business in China requires the domestic courts to accommodate private international law practices such as allowing foreign judgments to be recognized and enforced in the domestic courts: a clear indicator of globalization and the development of China's economy. 

     An important step China has taken in the past few years is to improve efficiency in recognizing and enforcing foreign judgments.  Specifically, the salient shift to a more liberal application of the reciprocity principle, the signing of the 2005 Hague Choice of Court Convention (2005 Hague Convention) and the growing number of bilateral treaties on judicial assistance are clear indicators of China's recent willingness to improve commercial certainty for the parties involved, to promote fairness for both domestic and foreign litigants, and to ensure the global movement of judgments, resulting in increased investor confidence and further economic growth in China.

     This chapter will analyse current theory and practice with respect to the recognition and enforcement of foreign civil and commercial judgments in China.  There are three regimes that will be analysed: (1) the existing Sino-bilateral judicial assistance treaties on civil and commercial matters; (2) in the absence of a bilateral treaty, the application by the Chinese courts of the principle of 'reciprocity' while taking account of procedural and substantive concerns specific to China; and (3) the potential impact of the 2005 Hague Convention signed by the Chinese government in September 2017...

Felix Chan on Enforcing Inconsistent Foreign Judgments (J Int'l Maritime L)

"Inconsistent Foreign Judgments on Exclusivity of Jurisdiction: Comity and Judicial Deference"
Felix Chan
The Journal of International Maritime Law 
2017, published, Vol.32, Issue 2, pp 91-95
Abstract: A domestic common law court is faced with an application to enforce a judgment issued by foreign court X. However, the judgment issued by court X is apparently inconsistent with another judgment previously rendered by foreign court Y. In addition, the action of court X in issuing the judgment may involve a breach of comity towards court Y. What should the domestic enforcing court do? What factors should the enforcing court consider when deciding whether the enforcement of the judgment rendered by court X is contrary to public policy on grounds of comity? In CompaniaSud Americana De Vapores SA v Hin-Pro International Logistics Ltd [2016] HKCFA 79, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers sitting in the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal articulated important principles and guidelines in these areas of private international law and the doctrine of comity. He identified the key factors the enforcing court should consider when evaluating whether the enforcement of a judgment rendered by foreign court X is contrary to public policy on grounds of comity, and whether the judgment of court X is in conflict with another judgment previously issued by foreign court Y on the same issue. Several aspects of Lord Phillips’ reasoning warrant further discussion and elucidation. 

Felix Chan Presents at the 9th East Asia Maritime Law Forum in Korea

Felix Chan attended the 9th East Asia Maritime Law Forum in South Korea on 11-12 November 2016. He presented a paper on the principles of English private international law relating to maritime contracts, while Professor Yvonne Baatz of Southampton Law School discussed the possible impact of Brexit on the EU conflict of laws. Other speakers from Waseda University, Kyushu University, Korea University, Dalian Maritime University and Shanghai Maritime University surveyed a range of topics regarding shipping, conflict of laws and admiralty jurisdictions. The forum was co-hosted by Korea University, Korea Maritime Law Association and the Incheon Port Authority of the South Korean Government.

Weixia Gu Awarded Top Prize in the 2015 Best Research Output Prize, China Society of Private International Law

Congratulations to Weixia Gu, whose article "15 Years of the Handover: The Rise, Discontent, and Positive Interaction of Cross-border Arbitration in Hong Kong and Mainland China" (full download available) was awarded the top prize (First Class Journal Article) in the 2015 Best Research Output Prize of the China Society of Private International Law (Society). The article was published in the University of Pennsylvania East Asia Law Review, volume 9, issue 1, pp. 42-98, published in April 2014. The research was an output of a General Research Fund project funded by the Research Grants Council. 

     Background on the prize: Every year, there are 10 research outputs in the area of private international law/conflict of laws in China and Greater China selected to be honoured by the Society as Best Research Output Prizes. The Prize Competition is organised by China Society of Private International Law Secretariat, and referees are leading experts in the field in China. Among the 10 outputs honoured, there are two honoured as “First Class”, three honoured as “Second Class”, and five honoured as “Third Class”. For the “First Class” Prizes, they are sub-divided as “Authored Book” (1 Prize) and “Journal Article” (1 Prize).  For more information on the award, click here (in Chinese).