Mimi Zou

Fangda Career Development Fellow in Chinese Commercial Law

Profile menu
Contact

Address

St Hugh's College

Oxford, OX2 6LE

Other affiliations

Email

Biography

Dr Zou holds the first post in Chinese law at the University of Oxford, where she has the role of developing the subject as a new field of study and research. She is also the Director of Studies in Law at Regent's Park College, Oxford. Dr Zou gives tutorials in the BA in Jurisprudence programme for undergraduate students at St Hugh's College and Regent's Park College. 

She is the co-founder of the Oxford Deep Tech Dispute Resolution Lab, which aims to build an internationally leading hub of interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder research cooperation on the study of deep technologies in dispute resolution.

Her main areas of expertise are in Chinese and comparative contract law, employment law, law and technology, and commercial dispute resolution, with over 60 publications in these fields. She is a member of the World Economic Forum Experts Network in the areas of China, Justice, and Blockchain.

She obtained her Doctor of Philosophy in Law and Bachelor of Civil Law (Distinction) degrees from Oxford (St John's College and Christ Church) on a Commonwealth Scholarship and a James Fairfax Oxford Australia Scholarship. She also graduated with first-class honours degrees in Law, Economics, and Social Sciences (University Medal) from the University of Sydney. She is currently completing an Executive MBA programme. Dr Zou has been admitted as a lawyer in the state of New South Wales (Australia) and a solicitor of England and Wales. She has also been called to the Bar of England and Wales. 

Prior to her appointment at Oxford, Dr Zou was Edwards Fellow at Columbia Law School, Assistant Professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and Senior Researcher at Utrecht University. Dr Zou has also been a visitor at a number of leading Chinese universities and research institutes.

She won the 2016 International Association of Labour Law Journals Marco Biagi Prize for Best Paper and was a finalist in the 2016 Taylor & Francis Commonwealth Scholar Best Journal Article Prize. She received the first Innovation in Teaching Award from the Faculty of Law at the Chinese University of Hong Kong in 2015 for pioneering a variety of blended learning initiatives. Her research has been cited in an Australian appellate court and several parliamentary inquiries and covered by international media outlets such as The New York Times, BBC, The Guardian, Reuters, China Daily, and South China Morning Post.

Dr Zou has worked or served as an adviser and consultant for international organisations, government departments, and firms in tech and professional services sectors in China, Europe, USA, and Australasia for over 15 years. She provides training on China-related legal, economic, cultural, and strategic issues for senior civil servants, diplomats, officers of the armed forces, lawyers, and business professionals around the world. She is a special adviser to the Great Britain China Centre, a non-departmental public body set up by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, and a distinguished expert on the Asia Society Policy Institute Belt and Road Task Force. In 2016, the Asia Society named Dr Zou an ‘Asia 21 Young Leader’. She is a finalist in the Asian Women of Achievement Awards, British Council's Education UK Alumni Awards, Young Australian of the Year Awards, and the inaugural 40 Under 40 Most Influential Asian-Australians Awards. 

 

 

Publications

Displaying 1 - 72 of 72. Sorted by year, then title.
Filter by
  • M Zou, Auditing International Law, paper presented at Chatham House Annual Conference on "A Rules-Based International Order: Preservation and Modernization", June 2019
  • M Zou, 'China and the Belt & Road Initiative: Transnational Labour Law under State Capitalism 4.0' (2019) American Journal of International Law Unbound 418
    Since the 2007 global financial crisis, many have questioned the predominant form of neoliberal capitalism that has underpinned a U.S.-led global economic order since the 1980s. Meanwhile, China’s state capitalism, led by the Chinese Communist Party, has been ascendant. Some have even posited a “Beijing Consensus” as an alternative to the “Washington Consensus.”1 This essay advances the concept of State Capitalism 4.0, which is premised on the Chinese party-state’s control over state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and private firms, mediated through regulatory and institutional arrangements and the strategic exploitation of technology. I apply this concept to analyse China’s approach to transnational labor issues as Chinese enterprises expand their activities abroad and mobilize a growing number of Chinese workers transnationally, especially under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Reflecting on the implications of State Capitalism 4.0 for transnational labor law, I argue that the strategic exercise of state regulatory powers can strengthen labor standards through domestic laws and institutions but is antithetical to a core international labor right: freedom of association.
  • M Zou, 'Economic Development and the "Social Rights Hypothesis": Regulating Labour Standards in China' (2019) 5 Asian Journal of Law and Society 315
    This paper provides a critical account of the various roles that labour law regulation has played in China's transition to a market-oriented economy. The analysis aims to contribute new insights to an ongoing debate on the relationship between economic development and legal rules and institutions in China. Discussions of social and labour rights have been on the periphery of a debate that has focused on property and contract rights (the so-called "Rights Hypothesis"). While numerous scholars have sought to debunk the explanatory power of the "Rights Hypothesis" in the case of China, I put forward an alternative "Social Rights Hypothesis". My proposed hypothesis seeks to explain how labour law rules and institutions have co-evolved with the emergence of a labour market in China's economic development. Specifically, labour law has not only played a market-constituting role, but also market-corrective and market-limiting functions.
  • M Zou, IT- Technologies and the Administration of Justice, paper presented at International Justice Forum, Nur-Sultan, September 2019
  • M Zou, 'Rethinking Exit in Temporary Migrants' Work Relations' in Bernard Ryan (ed), Migrant Labour and the Reshaping of Employment Law (Hart 2019) (forthcoming)
  • M Zou, The "Social Rights Hypothesis", Law and Development in China, paper presented at Association for Asian Studies 'Law, Society, and Justice' Workshop, University of Michigan, May 2019
  • M Zou and S Finder, 'The State of Commercial Dispute Resolution in China' (2019) Report for the Great Britain China Centre/ UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office project on Commercial Dispute Resolution in China
  • M Zou, An Introduction to Chinese Contract Law (LexisNexis 2018)
    Understanding the key concepts, rules, processes, and practice of Chinese contract law is essential to a wide range of business and commercial activities within and beyond the PRC. The broad aims of this book are to help students and practitioners from jurisdictions outside the PRC develop working knowledge of the general rights and obligations of parties to a contract governed by PRC law and understand the fundamental principles and rules in Chinese contract law for undertaking relevant and informed analysis of practical legal problems facing clients. This book provides a concise, clear, and accessible introduction to this subject area. It covers important aspects of Chinese contract law in terms of general principles, contract formation, interpretation of contractual terms, pre-contractual liability, validity and effectiveness issues, performance, modification, transfer, and assignment of contracts, termination and discharge of contracts, and liability and remedies for breach. The book offers students and practitioners the most up-to-date reference on the main legislative instruments and judicial interpretations that make up the general law of contract in the PRC. In addition, the author has carefully selected around 40 published cases in recent years, mainly from the Supreme People’s Court and higher-level people’s courts (including guiding cases and model/typical cases), to illustrate judicial application of key principles and rules of Chinese contract law in a variety of disputes.
  • M Zou, 'Future trends in commercial dispute settlement' (2018) Cross-Border Commercial Dispute Resolution in the Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing, 20 March 2018
  • M Zou, 'Social Media and Privacy in the Chinese Workplace: Why One Should Not 'Friend' Their Employer on WeChat' (2018) 40 Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal 101
    It is no understatement that social media has become a ubiquitous feature of our lives. In the People’s Republic of China, the popularity of social media usage continues to grow, particularly in the workplace setting. The vast quantity and range of data generated and shared on social networks, including personal information, have become a valuable resource for employers to screen job applicants, monitor work performance, and investigate employee wrongdoings. Developments in workplace surveillance technologies have also made it easier for employers to track, monitor, and access employees’ online activities. The legitimacy of employers’ inquiry into the online lives of job applicants and employees is often justified on the basis of business concerns about reputational risks, leakage of intellectual property and trade secrets, and other legal liabilities that could arise from employees’ social media activities. This article probes into a number of important regulatory challenges arising from employers’ access to and use of social media in China. It starts with an analysis of the extent to which privacy and data protection laws in China, including relatively recent developments in the Cyber Security Law and the General Rules of Civil Law, protect employees’ rights in this context. I then examine relevant cases brought before local courts that reveal how employers have accessed and made use of employees’ social media communications in a variety of common circumstances. From this analysis, three significant issues remain unresolved by lawmakers and the courts: unlawful discrimination arising from the use of social media in recruitment; employee speech that may harm an employer’s business and reputational interests; and off-duty social media communications of employees. I conclude that extant regulatory gaps provide much scope for employers in China to monitor and inquire into employees’ social media activities, especially in light of the power asymmetries in the employment relationship.
  • M Zou, 'The Chinese Belt and Road Initiative in Russia: consequences for business?' (2018) Keynote address, Seminar for Dutch businesses, Residence of the Netherlands Ambassador to Moscow, April 2018
  • M Zou, The Economic Rise of China: Implications for the Global Economy, paper presented at Royal College of Defence Studies PINNACLE Course
  • M Zou, “A Door that has Neither a Key nor Knob”: a New Regime of Personal Data Protection in China, paper presented at European Chinese Law Association Annual Meeting, September 2018
  • M Zou, 'Chinese Multinationals and Corporate Social Responsibility' (2017) Asian Jurist 52
  • M Zou, 'Regulating the Fissured Workplace: the Notion of the Employer in Chinese Employment Law' in Hiroya Nakakubo and Takashi Araki (eds), The Notion of Employer in the Era of the Fissured Workplace (Wolters Kluwer 2017)
    The term 'fissured workplace' has been coined by David Weil to describe fundamental changes in the organisation of work arising from firms' competitive strategies in the 21st century. As Weil put it, fissurisation refers to 'both a form of employment (for example, temporary agency employment; independent contracting) and a relationship between different business enterprises (subcontracting, franchising)'. In a fissured workplace that may have multiple legal entities intertwined in a range of complex contractual relationships, the notion of the 'employer' and thus the question of who should bear the legal responsibilities of an employer become extremely problematic. This paper examines the evolving phenonmenon of the fissured workplace in China and the regulatory dynamics of Chinese labour law in addressing the challenges of fissurisation over the past three decades. In the current phase of China's economic downturn, accelerating trends of fissurisation have brought to the forefront some major challenges for policymakers arising from the broader social consequences of fissured workplaces. The paper focuses on the notion of the 'employer' in Chinese labour law, particularly how policymakers in recent years have sought to regulate the use of labour dispatch as a prevalent manifestation of fissurisation in China.
  • M Zou, 'The Regulatory Challenges of “Uberization” in China: How to Classify Ride-Hailing Drivers?' (2017) 33 International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 269
    There has been nascent litigation around the world on the employment classification of workers in the ‘sharing economy’, ‘gig economy’ or ‘on demand economy’. New business models and forms of work organization arising from rapid advancements in digital technologies (or ‘disruptive innovation’ as some have described the phenomenon) have sparked considerable debate on a wide array of regulatory issues, including the role of labour law protections for the emergent ‘digital workforce’. This debate is currently taking place in the People’s Republic of China. This article analyses how Chinese courts and lawmakers have addressed issues that are directly or indirectly relevant to determining the status of drivers in the ride-hailing sector. Despite the presence of criteria for identifying a ‘labour relationship’ under Chinese labour law, the courts have not adopted a uniform approach across different types of claims involving these drivers. A new government regulation on the ride-hailing sector, which took effect in November 2016, has not resolved this issue as it permits ride-hailing platform companies to enter into labour contracts and other forms of agreements with drivers based on the particularities of their work arrangements. In considering these recent cases and regulatory developments, the article concludes that a purposive approach to the existing criteria in Chinese labour law for ascertaining the status of workers in the sharing economy is useful for addressing the basic question of whether they should be protected, rather than creating ‘new’ categories of employment classification.
  • M Zou, China's new immigration regime: Regulating foreign labour in an emerging destination country, paper presented at New Foundations of Labour Law in the Globalised Market Economy International Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, May 2016
  • M Zou, Do We Need a UN Convention on the Rights of Older Persons?, paper presented at Chinese Academy of Social Sciences International Cooperation in Human Rights Forum, Beijing, October 2016
  • M Zou, 'Employer Demand for “Skilled” Migrant Workers: Regulating Admission under the United Kingdom’s Tier 2 (General) Visa' in Joanne Howe and Rosemary Owens (eds), Temporary Labour Migration in the Global Era: The Regulatory Changes (Hart 2016)
    In our time of globalisation, the admission of migrant workers is one of the most debated public policy issues around the world. Over the past two decades, temporary migrant workers programmes (TMWPs) have expanded across all sectors and both ends of the skills spectrum in numerous advanced industrialised countries. These TMWPs are commonly based on a demand-driven model of employer sponsorship aimed at filling shortages in the local labour market on a short-term basis. Assessing employers’ claims in relation to ‘skills’ and ‘shortages’ is often a highly contested component of regulating admission under TMWPs. The admission criteria and processes of such schemes can have significant implications for the interests of and relations between different migrants, local workers, and employers in the host state. This chapter examines the regulatory challenges arising from the conditions of entry under the United Kingdom’s employer-sponsored Tier 2 (General) visa scheme, including the number of migrants admitted, the occupations, sectors, and geographical areas where they are recruited, as well as migrants’ skills and attributes. Employers may desire a laissez faire model of employer-led admission where they can freely decide who and how many migrant workers to admit. Yet, as reforms to the admission criteria under Tier 2 (General) visa scheme in recent years suggest, other competing policy considerations may prevail such as the interests of resident workers in having privileged access to the labour market and in ensuring these schemes are not used to undercut their wages and working conditions.
  • M Zou, 'Labour standards on the One Belt One Road' in XI Chao and Lutz Christian Wolff (eds), Legal Dimensions of China’s One Belt One Road (Wolters Kluwer 2016)
    Chinese multinational enterprises (MNEs) are emerging as increasingly influential actors in the global political economy. Since the late 1990s, China has adopted a ‘Going Out’ industrialisation policy entailing the accelerated internationalisation of Chinese firms to acquire assets and expand business operations abroad. The centrepiece of the forthcoming phase of the ‘Going Out’ strategy is the ‘One Belt One Road’ (OBOR or ‘Belt and Road’) initiative, aimed at fostering closer economic connectivity between China and over 60 other countries with an emphasis on infrastructure and transportation projects. With the rapid expansion of Chinese outbound investments, there have been growing controversies over the social impacts on host countries. The conduct of Chinese state-owned enterprises and private firms investing along the ‘Belt and Road’ are likely to be subject to ever increasing scrutiny. OBOR has also been seen by some as a geo-political strategy that reflects China’s desire for a bigger role in global affairs. As such, there may be increasing expectations among the international community that China should ensure that its firms act as ‘good corporate citizens’ abroad. Indeed, unfavourable consequences for China’s image have already prompted the government to introduce regulations, guidelines, and policies in recent years that aim to govern the conduct of Chinese MNEs. There has also been an emerging set of corporate social responsibility schemes and codes of conduct adopted by Chinese MNEs and industry groups, often with the involvement of government authorities. This paper addresses a critical issue that arises as to the ways in which the world’s largest industrialising economy, in pursuing a new industrial development strategy that will broaden its role in global markets and production networks as well as its potential geo-political influence, may shape the governance of international labour standards. Could China (including its public and private actors) become a new standard-setter?
  • M Zou and J Goudkamp, 'Hounga v Allen [2014] UKSC 47' (2015) 21 Journal of Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Law 56 [Case Note]
    The claimant, Ms Hounga, travelled to the United Kingdom from Nigeria in 2007. She was then aged around 14. Upon her arrival, the claimant was granted a visitor visa on the ground that her purpose for being in the United Kingdom was to see relatives. In fact, the claimant had intended to study and work illegally for the respondents, Mr and Mrs Allen. The claimant worked as an au pair for the respondents, who were complicit in the claimant's immigration offences, although they neither paid her nor, as promised, provided her with education. The respondents' treatment of the claimant was, on any measure, highly exploitative. It included physical abuse. Eventually, the claimant was dismissed from her employment, whereupon she brought several claims against the respondents, including a claim in the statutory tort of race discrimination with respect to her dismissal (s 4(2)(c) of the Race Relations Act 1976 (now s 39(2)(c) of the Equality Act 2010)). The Employment Tribunal upheld that claim. The respondents relied on the illegality defence but the Tribunal found that it was inapplicable. The respondents' appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal was dismissed. The Court of Appeal ([2012] IRLR 685) reversed the findings below, holding that the illegality defence applied because the discrimination was inextricably linked with the claimant's illegal conduct. The claimant appealed to the Supreme Court.
  • J Woo, H Chan, A Chong and M Zou, 'Medical Ethical Principles may Drive Improvement of Quality of Dying in Hong Kong' (2015) 14 Journal of Palliative Care and Medicine 580
    Population ageing raises concern regarding the quality of end of life care (EOLC), not only for people with cancer but for all dying of end stage chronic diseases, particularly for dementia. Medical ethical principles, legal and cultural factors affect the quality of end of life care. This article discusses how these three factors currently contribute to EOLC in Hong Kong, in the context of differing trajectories of development in China, other Asian countries, and the USA. EOLC for non cancer patients has only recently been highlighted, where ethical, legal, and cultural issues are being debated. Although there is no statute or case law that directly govern the legal status of advance directives in Hong Kong, a validly made advance directive is generally recognized at common law. However, there is a range of other legal barriers to providing EOLC according to medical ethical principles. There is little discussion among health care providers or the public regarding advance directives, euthanasia, physician assisted suicide, or withdrawal of life support, particularly for those with dementia. It is hoped that a continuing medical ethics discourse regarding EOLC issues may provide momentum to overcome current inertia or avoidance of EOLC issues, such that population aging may not be accompanied by increasingly poor quality of care in the dying process.
  • M Zou and J Goudkamp, 'The Defence of Illegality in Tort Law: Beyond Judicial Redemption?' (2015) 74 Cambridge Law Journal 13 [Case Note]
    IN Hounga v Allen [2014] UKSC 47; [2014] 1 W.L.R. 2889, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld a claim in the statutory tort of discrimination by a woman who had been dismissed from her employment. The fact that the woman had been working in breach of immigration laws did not enliven the illegality defence. Hounga is one of several recent cases in which the illegality defence has been examined at the ultimate appellate level, the other decisions being Gray v Thames Trains Ltd [2009] UKHL 33; [2009] 1 A.C. 1339, Stone & Rolls Ltd v Moore Stephens [2009] UKHL 39; [2009] A.C. 1391, and Les Laboratoires Servier v Apotex Inc [2014] UKSC 55; [2014] 3 W.L.R. 1257. The fact that the defence has been considered so frequently as of late at the apex level seems to confirm that the Law Commission was wrong in its prediction, made shortly after Gray and Moore Stephens were decided, that the defence would be brought into a satisfactory state if responsibility for reforming it was left to the courts (The Illegality Defence (Law Com 320, 2010), at [3.37]–[3.41]). We are not alone in holding this view. Writing extra-judicially, Lord Mance and Lord Sumption have called for the Law Commission to re-examine the defence (J. Mance, “Ex Turpi Causa – When Latin Avoids Liability” (2014) 18 Edinburgh Law Review 175, 192; J. Sumption, “Reflections on the Law of Illegality” (2012) 20 Restitution Law Review 1, 8–12). We argue here that Hounga perpetuates (and possibly aggravates) the difficulties from which this area of law suffers.
  • M Zou, 'The Legal Construction of Hyper-dependence and Hyper-Precarity in Migrant Work Relations' (2015) 31 International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 141
    he two key concepts developed in this article, ‘hyper-dependence’ and ‘hyper-precarity’, are aimed at drawing attention to the constitutive role of immigration law in shaping certain vulnerabilities in migrants’ work relations. Immigration law is not merely concerned with controlling the entry and exit of migrants, but also creates personal legal statuses – some highly precarious – that shape their employment and residence in the host state. The two ‘hyper’ concepts seek to elucidate the most problematic features of Temporary Migrant Worker Programmes (TMWPs) currently found in a number of advanced industrialized, liberal democratic countries. Hyper-dependence refers to a particular tie of migrant workers to their employers as a requirement of their legal status. Hyper-precarity refers to the tenuous nature, in law and practice, of these workers’ entitlements to employment protection, social rights, and transition to more secure residence status. In some circumstances both hyper-dependence and hyper-precarity can combine to give rise to extremely exploitative situations for migrants at work. This article explores possible normative constraints on states’ design and implementation of TMWPs. It identifies two genres of normative interventions that may respond to the legal construction of hyper-precarity and hyper-dependence: first, the international human rights framework, and second, the discourse against forms of exploitation that could be regarded as ‘unfree labour’. However, it is argued that neither of the discourses poses a fundamental challenge to host states’ powers to create the precarious statuses of non-citizens admitted into their territory, nor do they tackle the complex realities of migrants’ work relations on a continuum of exploitation.
  • M Zou, 'The Evolution of Collective Labour Law with “Chinese Characteristics”: Crossing the river by feeling the stones?' in Roger Blanpain, Ulla Liukkunen and Yifeng Chen (eds), China and ILO Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Bulletin of Comparative Labour Relations 2014)
    The expression of ‘crossing a river by feeling the stones’ (mozhe shitou guo he), popularised by Deng Xiaoping, is commonly evoked by Chinese policy-makers to promote a cautious, gradual, and selective approach to reform that takes into account ‘Chinese characteristics’ (zhongguo teshe). Over the past three decades, the framework for regulating collective labour relations in China appears to have evolved in this manner. However this approach may not be able to respond to the rapidly changing currents of China’s new market economy that have generated conflicting interests between labour and capital. The continued absence of genuine collective labour representation mechanisms at the workplace/enterprise level has seen the escalation of labour disputes in various forms and on different scales. The implementation of the International Labour Organization’s (ILO) fundamental principles and rights at work concerning freedom of association and collective bargaining would constitute an important step towards addressing the structural deficiencies in China’s collective labour relations framework by providing a vehicle for worker voice and for a fairer distribution of economic gains. This would strengthen the foundation for sound labour market governance based on a new approach of ‘crossing the river by building a bridge’ (dajian qiaoliang guo he).
  • M Zou, V. Korff, T. Zwart and R. Wittek, 'Rational Choice Theory and Human Rights' in David Brunsma, Kerri Smith, and Brian Gran (eds), The Handbook of Sociology and Human Rights (Paradigm Publishers 2012)
  • M Zou, 'Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace: Beyond the Business Case to Effective Reflexive Regulation' (2009) 1 Australian Law Students’ Association Academic Journal 17
  • M Zou, 'Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace: Beyond the Business Case to Effective Reflexive Regulation' (2009) Australian Law Students' Association Academic Journal 17
  • M Zou and R Lansbury, 'Multinational Corporations and Employment Relations in China: the case of Beijing Hyundai Motor Company' (2009) 20 Journal of International Human Resource Management 2349
    This contribution examines the transfer of employment relations policies and practices from the domestic operations of the Hyundai Motor Company (HMC) in Ulsan, Korea to its joint venture in China, the Beijing Hyundai Motors Company (BHMC). An integrated ‘political economy’ theoretical framework is used to analyse the complex interaction of institutional, strategic and micro-political forces that have shaped the hybrid model of employment relations at BHMC. The study shows that the transfer of policies and practices from Ulsan to Beijing has been influenced not only by institutional differences between the home and host countries and the strategies pursued by HMC management, but also by the political contests between various actors within and outside BHMC. Our research findings show that HMC headquarters has sought to maintain control over employment relations at BHMC through the transfer of its core policies and practices from its Korean operations to BHMC. However, a hybrid model has emerged at BHMC with some notable differences to HMC's Ulsan plant. Utilising an integrated political economy perspective, this contribution has shown that BHMC's employment relations policies and practices have been shaped and conditioned by a complex interplay of institutional and market forces, strategic choices and ongoing political contests between various actors within and beyond BHMC.

Research projects

Research Interests

My current research programmes focus on commercial law issues in the contexts of China’s digital economy and Chinese outbound foreign investments.

Options taught

Contract, Tort

Events organised by Mimi Zou

29 Jan 2020

Wednesday - 5:00PM

When Blockchain Meets Arbitration: the Birth of Decentralized Justice

Chinese Law Discussion Group

Speaker

Dr Federico Ast

Speaker Affiliation

Kleros.io

Venue

St Hugh's College - Dobbs Room

Past events

20 Jan 2020

Monday - 12:30PM

Lunar New Year Luncheon

Chinese Law Discussion Group

Venue

St Hugh's College - MGA Lecture Room

26 Nov 2019

Tuesday - 5:00PM

How Litigation Funding Helps Drive the Use of Dispute Resolution Technology

Speaker

Susan Dunn, Founder, Harbour Litigation Funding

Venue

Law Board Room - St Cross Building

25 Oct 2019

Friday - 1:00PM

The use of AI and Smart contracts to address Africa’s contracting challenges

Speaker

Herman Singh

Speaker Affiliation

CEO, Future Advisory

Venue

Faculty of Law - Seminar Room F

06 Jun 2019

Thursday - 5:00PM

National security, free trade agreements and investment – the case of China

Chinese Law Discussion Group

Speaker

Prof. Vivienne Bath

Speaker Affiliation

University of Sydney

Venue

St Hugh's College - Dickson Poon Building Lecture Theatre (entrance from Canterbury Road)

14 May 2019

Tuesday - 1:00PM

Law, Technology & IP in China: The Next Great Leap Forward?

Chinese Law Discussion Group

Speaker

Dev Gangjee, Peter Yu, Dan Prud'homme, Mimi Zou

Venue

Lucina Ho Seminar Room-Dickson Poon Building (St Hugh’s College)

01 May 2019

Wednesday - 1:00PM

Connecting London and China’s capital markets

Chinese Law Discussion Group

Speaker

Karen Northey

Speaker Affiliation

London Stock Exchange Group

Venue

St Hugh's College - Dickson Poon Building Lecture Theatre (entrance from Canterbury Road)

12 Feb 2019

Tuesday - 5:00PM

Defining National Values: In Conversation with the President of the American Civil Liberties Union

Speaker

Prof. Susan Herman

Speaker Affiliation

ACLU

Venue

Faculty of Law - The Cube

04 Feb 2019

Monday - 1:00PM

Party Norms and Constitutional Conventions

Chinese Law Discussion Group

Speaker

Ewan Smith

Speaker Affiliation

University of Oxford

Venue

St Hugh's College - Dickson Poon U of Oxford China Centre - Lecture Theatre (entrance from Canterbury Road)

Research projects