For more information, see the Squire website at:

http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent_scholars/

This Wolfson College Cambridge event featured two insightful panel discussions with distinguished law professionals; an afternoon tea and a formal dinner to conclude the day.

The event was primarily aimed at Wolfson Law and Criminology alumni, current students, and individuals working in the legal field.

Panel One: Environmental Regulation in the Era of Climate Change

• Chair: Tugba Basaran (Wolfson College)
• Speakers: Prof Surabhi Ranganathan (Lauterpacht Centre for International Law), Prof Avidan Kent (University of East Anglia), Róisín Finnegan (Barrister, Six Pump Court)

Panel Two: Is the Architecture of International Justice under threat?

• Chair: Thomas Grant (Wolfson College)
• Speakers: Prof Nicola Padfield (Emeritus Professor of Criminal and Penal Justice; Former Director, Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice), Isuru Devendra (Barrister, 36 Stone), Marie-Anne Coninsx (first EU Ambassador to the Arctic 2017-2019)

For more information see: https://www.wolfson.cam.ac.uk/about/events/sixth-annual-wolfson-sir-david-williams-law-society-event

This Wolfson College Cambridge event featured two insightful panel discussions with distinguished law professionals; an afternoon tea and a formal dinner to conclude the day.

The event was primarily aimed at Wolfson Law and Criminology alumni, current students, and individuals working in the legal field.

Panel One: Environmental Regulation in the Era of Climate Change

• Chair: Tugba Basaran (Wolfson College)
• Speakers: Prof Surabhi Ranganathan (Lauterpacht Centre for International Law), Prof Avidan Kent (University of East Anglia), Róisín Finnegan (Barrister, Six Pump Court)

Panel Two: Is the Architecture of International Justice under threat?

• Chair: Thomas Grant (Wolfson College)
• Speakers: Prof Nicola Padfield (Emeritus Professor of Criminal and Penal Justice; Former Director, Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice), Isuru Devendra (Barrister, 36 Stone), Marie-Anne Coninsx (first EU Ambassador to the Arctic 2017-2019)

For more information see: https://www.wolfson.cam.ac.uk/about/events/sixth-annual-wolfson-sir-david-williams-law-society-event

Key themes from the address include:

• Constitutional Evolution: The 2005 transition from the "Law Lords" in the House of Lords to an independent Supreme Court, emphasising the separation of powers and increased transparency.
• The Supreme Court's Mandate: The court acts as a final arbiter for "points of law of general public importance," deciding cases that shape the development of the law across the UK.
• The Value of Dissent: A rigorous defence of the right to issue dissenting judgments, which Lord Lloyd-Jones argues enhances intellectual rigour and signals that the law is a living debate.
• The Global Reach of the Privy Council: An exploration of its role as the final court of appeal for 29 overseas jurisdictions, highlighting its unique ability to apply local laws - from common law to the Napoleonic Code.
• Constitutional Boundaries: A comparison between the UK’s principle of parliamentary sovereignty - where courts cannot strike down primary legislation - and other jurisdictions where the Privy Council may invalidate unconstitutional laws.

Lord Lloyd-Jones concludes by encouraging the next generation of "high fliers" to pursue careers in the law, promising a rewarding and intellectually stimulating path.

For more information about the Conference, see:

https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/access-outreach/exploring-law-conference

Among the rule of law's many virtues is its capacity to provide a framework for deliberating competing ideas of justice, fairness and equality. Yet a value once widely shared is now increasingly contested in both status and meaning. The Centre held this event to explore these and related questions.

The seminar was structured around four core sub-themes. Each of these will begin with a 20-minute presentation followed by a facilitated discussion:

• I:The Nature of Values in Supranational Legal Orders - Nabil H. Khabirpour (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• II: The Judiciary and the Rule of Law in Europe - Lord Justice Baker (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• III: The Rule of Law, the Market, and European Identity - Professor Catherine Barnard (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• IV: Enforcing the Rule of Law as a Value under EU Law - Professor Albertina Albors-Llorens (Video (YouTube) / Audio)

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/activities-archive

Among the rule of law's many virtues is its capacity to provide a framework for deliberating competing ideas of justice, fairness and equality. Yet a value once widely shared is now increasingly contested in both status and meaning. The Centre held this event to explore these and related questions.

The seminar was structured around four core sub-themes. Each of these will begin with a 20-minute presentation followed by a facilitated discussion:

• I:The Nature of Values in Supranational Legal Orders - Nabil H. Khabirpour (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• II: The Judiciary and the Rule of Law in Europe - Lord Justice Baker (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• III: The Rule of Law, the Market, and European Identity - Professor Catherine Barnard (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• IV: Enforcing the Rule of Law as a Value under EU Law - Professor Albertina Albors-Llorens (Video (YouTube) / Audio)

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/activities-archive

Among the rule of law's many virtues is its capacity to provide a framework for deliberating competing ideas of justice, fairness and equality. Yet a value once widely shared is now increasingly contested in both status and meaning. The Centre held this event to explore these and related questions.

The seminar was structured around four core sub-themes. Each of these will begin with a 20-minute presentation followed by a facilitated discussion:

• I:The Nature of Values in Supranational Legal Orders - Nabil H. Khabirpour (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• II: The Judiciary and the Rule of Law in Europe - Lord Justice Baker (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• III: The Rule of Law, the Market, and European Identity - Professor Catherine Barnard (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• IV: Enforcing the Rule of Law as a Value under EU Law - Professor Albertina Albors-Llorens (Video (YouTube) / Audio)

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/activities-archive

Among the rule of law's many virtues is its capacity to provide a framework for deliberating competing ideas of justice, fairness and equality. Yet a value once widely shared is now increasingly contested in both status and meaning. The Centre held this event to explore these and related questions.

The seminar was structured around four core sub-themes. Each of these will begin with a 20-minute presentation followed by a facilitated discussion:

• I:The Nature of Values in Supranational Legal Orders - Nabil H. Khabirpour (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• II: The Judiciary and the Rule of Law in Europe - Lord Justice Baker (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• III: The Rule of Law, the Market, and European Identity - Professor Catherine Barnard (Video (YouTube) / Audio)
• IV: Enforcing the Rule of Law as a Value under EU Law - Professor Albertina Albors-Llorens (Video (YouTube) / Audio)

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/activities-archive

Session 3: Comparative Experience and Potential Reform

On Saturday 21 March 2026, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights'

In Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2024] EWHC 1809 (Ch), [63], Mellor J. observed

“IP rights, being monopolies of various sorts, are … justified in that their net benefit is in the public interest, with a view to fostering creativity and innovation. By corollary, where IP rights are abused to stifle creativity and innovation, the legal system ought to have the means to respond effectively.”

The statement raises three questions which are the subject of this conference: (i) when are IP rights to be regarded as “abused”? (ii) What mechanisms exist to respond to such abuses? And (iii) Does the legal system have sufficient mechanisms by which to “respond effectively”?

Programme:

Abuses (This session not recorded)

- Abuses of Trade Marks – Stuart Baran (3 New Square)

- Abuses of Designs – David Stone (White & Case)

- Abuse in FRAND Patent Litigation – Daniel Alexander KC (8 New Square)

Current Disinventives and Remedies

- Remedies for Abuses: Actions for Threats – Trevor Cook (Bird and Bird)

- Preventing Misuse of interim injunctions: The Cross-Undertaking - Dr Katarina Foss-Solbrekk (University of Copenhagen)

- Remedies for Abuses: The Role and Limits of Competition Law to Prevent Enforcement of Invalid IPRs– Dr Quentin Schaefer (11 South Square)

- Preventing Abuses: Ethical Obligations of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – Phil Barnes (BarnesIP)

Comparative Experience and Potential Reform

- Does the UK Need a Distinct Doctrine of Abuse of Right? – Lessons from the Civil Law – Dr Amandine Leonard (University of Edinburgh)

- Abuse of IP Rights. Lessons from the United States? Professor Leah Grinwald (Dean and Richard J. Morgan Professor of Law, University of Nevada)

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Full title: 'Does the UK Need a Distinct Doctrine of Abuse of Right? – Lessons from the Civil Law'

Session 3: Comparative Experience and Potential Reform

On Saturday 21 March 2026, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights'

In Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2024] EWHC 1809 (Ch), [63], Mellor J. observed

“IP rights, being monopolies of various sorts, are … justified in that their net benefit is in the public interest, with a view to fostering creativity and innovation. By corollary, where IP rights are abused to stifle creativity and innovation, the legal system ought to have the means to respond effectively.”

The statement raises three questions which are the subject of this conference: (i) when are IP rights to be regarded as “abused”? (ii) What mechanisms exist to respond to such abuses? And (iii) Does the legal system have sufficient mechanisms by which to “respond effectively”?

Programme:

Abuses (This session not recorded)

- Abuses of Trade Marks – Stuart Baran (3 New Square)

- Abuses of Designs – David Stone (White & Case)

- Abuse in FRAND Patent Litigation – Daniel Alexander KC (8 New Square)

Current Disinventives and Remedies

- Remedies for Abuses: Actions for Threats – Trevor Cook (Bird and Bird)

- Preventing Misuse of interim injunctions: The Cross-Undertaking - Dr Katarina Foss-Solbrekk (University of Copenhagen)

- Remedies for Abuses: The Role and Limits of Competition Law to Prevent Enforcement of Invalid IPRs– Dr Quentin Schaefer (11 South Square)

- Preventing Abuses: Ethical Obligations of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – Phil Barnes (BarnesIP)

Comparative Experience and Potential Reform

- Does the UK Need a Distinct Doctrine of Abuse of Right? – Lessons from the Civil Law – Dr Amandine Leonard (University of Edinburgh)

- Abuse of IP Rights. Lessons from the United States? Professor Leah Grinwald (Dean and Richard J. Morgan Professor of Law, University of Nevada)

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 2: Current Disincentives and Remedies

On Saturday 21 March 2026, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights'

In Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2024] EWHC 1809 (Ch), [63], Mellor J. observed

“IP rights, being monopolies of various sorts, are … justified in that their net benefit is in the public interest, with a view to fostering creativity and innovation. By corollary, where IP rights are abused to stifle creativity and innovation, the legal system ought to have the means to respond effectively.”

The statement raises three questions which are the subject of this conference: (i) when are IP rights to be regarded as “abused”? (ii) What mechanisms exist to respond to such abuses? And (iii) Does the legal system have sufficient mechanisms by which to “respond effectively”?

Programme:

Abuses (This session not recorded)

- Abuses of Trade Marks – Stuart Baran (3 New Square)

- Abuses of Designs – David Stone (White & Case)

- Abuse in FRAND Patent Litigation – Daniel Alexander KC (8 New Square)

Current Disinventives and Remedies

- Remedies for Abuses: Actions for Threats – Trevor Cook (Bird and Bird)

- Preventing Misuse of interim injunctions: The Cross-Undertaking - Dr Katarina Foss-Solbrekk (University of Copenhagen)

- Remedies for Abuses: The Role and Limits of Competition Law to Prevent Enforcement of Invalid IPRs– Dr Quentin Schaefer (11 South Square)

- Preventing Abuses: Ethical Obligations of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – Phil Barnes (BarnesIP)

Comparative Experience and Potential Reform

- Does the UK Need a Distinct Doctrine of Abuse of Right? – Lessons from the Civil Law – Dr Amandine Leonard (University of Edinburgh)

- Abuse of IP Rights. Lessons from the United States? Professor Leah Grinwald (Dean and Richard J. Morgan Professor of Law, University of Nevada)

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 2: Current Disincentives and Remedies

On Saturday 21 March 2026, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights'

In Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2024] EWHC 1809 (Ch), [63], Mellor J. observed

“IP rights, being monopolies of various sorts, are … justified in that their net benefit is in the public interest, with a view to fostering creativity and innovation. By corollary, where IP rights are abused to stifle creativity and innovation, the legal system ought to have the means to respond effectively.”

The statement raises three questions which are the subject of this conference: (i) when are IP rights to be regarded as “abused”? (ii) What mechanisms exist to respond to such abuses? And (iii) Does the legal system have sufficient mechanisms by which to “respond effectively”?

Programme:

Abuses (This session not recorded)

- Abuses of Trade Marks – Stuart Baran (3 New Square)

- Abuses of Designs – David Stone (White & Case)

- Abuse in FRAND Patent Litigation – Daniel Alexander KC (8 New Square)

Current Disinventives and Remedies

- Remedies for Abuses: Actions for Threats – Trevor Cook (Bird and Bird)

- Preventing Misuse of interim injunctions: The Cross-Undertaking - Dr Katarina Foss-Solbrekk (University of Copenhagen)

- Remedies for Abuses: The Role and Limits of Competition Law to Prevent Enforcement of Invalid IPRs– Dr Quentin Schaefer (11 South Square)

- Preventing Abuses: Ethical Obligations of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – Phil Barnes (BarnesIP)

Comparative Experience and Potential Reform

- Does the UK Need a Distinct Doctrine of Abuse of Right? – Lessons from the Civil Law – Dr Amandine Leonard (University of Edinburgh)

- Abuse of IP Rights. Lessons from the United States? Professor Leah Grinwald (Dean and Richard J. Morgan Professor of Law, University of Nevada)

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 2: Current Disincentives and Remedies

On Saturday 21 March 2026, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights'

In Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2024] EWHC 1809 (Ch), [63], Mellor J. observed

“IP rights, being monopolies of various sorts, are … justified in that their net benefit is in the public interest, with a view to fostering creativity and innovation. By corollary, where IP rights are abused to stifle creativity and innovation, the legal system ought to have the means to respond effectively.”

The statement raises three questions which are the subject of this conference: (i) when are IP rights to be regarded as “abused”? (ii) What mechanisms exist to respond to such abuses? And (iii) Does the legal system have sufficient mechanisms by which to “respond effectively”?

Programme:

Abuses (This session not recorded)

- Abuses of Trade Marks – Stuart Baran (3 New Square)

- Abuses of Designs – David Stone (White & Case)

- Abuse in FRAND Patent Litigation – Daniel Alexander KC (8 New Square)

Current Disinventives and Remedies

- Remedies for Abuses: Actions for Threats – Trevor Cook (Bird and Bird)

- Preventing Misuse of interim injunctions: The Cross-Undertaking - Dr Katarina Foss-Solbrekk (University of Copenhagen)

- Remedies for Abuses: The Role and Limits of Competition Law to Prevent Enforcement of Invalid IPRs– Dr Quentin Schaefer (11 South Square)

- Preventing Abuses: Ethical Obligations of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – Phil Barnes (BarnesIP)

Comparative Experience and Potential Reform

- Does the UK Need a Distinct Doctrine of Abuse of Right? – Lessons from the Civil Law – Dr Amandine Leonard (University of Edinburgh)

- Abuse of IP Rights. Lessons from the United States? Professor Leah Grinwald (Dean and Richard J. Morgan Professor of Law, University of Nevada)

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 2: Current Disincentives and Remedies

On Saturday 21 March 2026, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights'

In Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2024] EWHC 1809 (Ch), [63], Mellor J. observed

“IP rights, being monopolies of various sorts, are … justified in that their net benefit is in the public interest, with a view to fostering creativity and innovation. By corollary, where IP rights are abused to stifle creativity and innovation, the legal system ought to have the means to respond effectively.”

The statement raises three questions which are the subject of this conference: (i) when are IP rights to be regarded as “abused”? (ii) What mechanisms exist to respond to such abuses? And (iii) Does the legal system have sufficient mechanisms by which to “respond effectively”?

Programme:

Abuses (This session not recorded)

- Abuses of Trade Marks – Stuart Baran (3 New Square)

- Abuses of Designs – David Stone (White & Case)

- Abuse in FRAND Patent Litigation – Daniel Alexander KC (8 New Square)

Current Disinventives and Remedies

- Remedies for Abuses: Actions for Threats – Trevor Cook (Bird and Bird)

- Preventing Misuse of interim injunctions: The Cross-Undertaking - Dr Katarina Foss-Solbrekk (University of Copenhagen)

- Remedies for Abuses: The Role and Limits of Competition Law to Prevent Enforcement of Invalid IPRs– Dr Quentin Schaefer (11 South Square)

- Preventing Abuses: Ethical Obligations of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – Phil Barnes (BarnesIP)

Comparative Experience and Potential Reform

- Does the UK Need a Distinct Doctrine of Abuse of Right? – Lessons from the Civil Law – Dr Amandine Leonard (University of Edinburgh)

- Abuse of IP Rights. Lessons from the United States? Professor Leah Grinwald (Dean and Richard J. Morgan Professor of Law, University of Nevada)

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

The lecture entitled 'Thirty Plus One: TRIPS, Innovation, and the Political Future of Minimum IP Standards' took place at Emmanuel College, Cambridge.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/

Abstract: A remarkable transformation is taking place in our financial markets. The rise of machine learning algorithms and other artificial intelligence models has rapidly overtaken older methods of financial decisionmaking, and the consequences of the revolution are beginning to be felt across the capital markets ecosystem, from stock exchanges to derivatives markets to currency trading. These new technologies offer great promise, including more accurate prices, faster transactions and more efficient trading. But they also create risks. From flash crashes to insider trading algorithms to adversarial attacks, artificial intelligence presents a range of unique vulnerabilities that could lead to significant and wide-ranging harm to our financial system. Legal frameworks devised to structure and constrain financial institutions, in turn, are ill-equipped to deal with these harms because they were designed based on outdated assumptions about the structure of markets, as well as the nature of its primary actors. This Article offers the first comprehensive account of the economic, political and legal consequences of the rise of artificially intelligent markets. It demonstrates how the major driver of this shift has been the hedge fund industry, an opaque and lightly regulated sector of the financial ecosystem that has long been an early-adopter of financial technology. It concludes by proposing a series of escalating regulatory reforms that might better fit financial regulation to our new artificially intelligent markets.

William Magnuson is a professor at Texas A&M Law School, where he teaches corporate law. Prior to joining Texas A&M, he taught law at Harvard, worked as an associate in the mergers and acquisitions group of Sullivan & Cromwell, and served as a journalist in the Rome bureau of the Washington Post. He is the author of For Profit: A History of Corporations (Basic Books, 2022) and Blockchain Democracy: Technology, Law and the Rule of the Crowd (Cambridge University Press, 2020). His work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Financial Times, the L.A. Times, and Bloomberg. He holds a B.A. from Princeton University, a J.D. from Harvard Law School, and an M.A. from the University of Padua.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Ambassador Tomohiro Mikanagi is the Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative of Japan to the United Nations and was the Japanese Legal Advisor from 2022 to 2024. He also holds the title of Ambassador-at-Large for Cooperation on International Law.

He was a visiting fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre of International Law and is currently an LCIL Partner Fellow. He participated in the proceedings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for the Advisory Opinion issued on July 19, 2024. Japan's oral statement in February 2024 was unique as it focused exclusively on the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force.

Chair: Prof Sandesh Sivakumaran

Biography: David A. Simon, J.D., LL.M., Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Law at Northeastern University School of Law, where he teaches courses on tort law, administrative law, and drug & device regulation. Professor Simon’s research focuses on innovation in healthcare, with an emphasis on drugs and devices. His work has appeared or will appear in a variety of publications, including the Texas Law Review, the Boston College Law Review, the Emory Law Journal, the Georgia Law Review, the Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, the Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities, the Journal of Law & the Biosciences, JAMA, Nature Biotechnology and the Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics. A complete list of Dr. Simon’s publications is available on his CV . Professor Simon is the Principal Investigator on the Project on Medical Device Safety and co-director of the Amy J. Reed Collaborative for Medical Device Safety, funded by Arnold Ventures. He is also a member of the UIUC CLASSICA research team, a project funded by the European Union. He has previously served on the faculties of Harvard Law School, George Washington University Law School, and the University of Kansas School of Law. During histime at Harvard Law School, he led a three-year project at the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics dubbed Diagnosing in the Home: The Ethical, Legal, and Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Home Health, and funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Professor Simon is also a founder of two nonprofits—Harmed Americans for Reform in Medical-Device Safety and Project TCF20—and a practicing member of the Illinois and Massachusetts Bars.

Abstract: Copyright law grants authors special non-economic “moral rights” to prevent others from using their works in certain ways. In their strongest “solipsistic” form, moral rights give the author the absolute power to prevent any use that offends her sensibilities. While the solipsistic view of moral rights exists in only a few countries, the sentiment underlying it is pervasive in moral rights theory: an author’s claims are superior to all others because only the author knows when harm occurs, regardless of others’ views. In other words, certain uses of works result in the author experiencing harm that no one else can experience and that does not depend on what others think. This Article asks and evaluates the following question: can harm based only on the author’s subjective experience justify solipsistic moral rights?

It argues that the answer is probably not—and that, if supported, solipsistic moral rights will be tightly limited. Drawing on literature in science fiction and philosophy, this Article. contends that the best justification for the monastic view is also the most implausible: authors have moral rights only when another’s use causes the author to experience an inconsistency between her perceived use of the work and her memories of creating the work. In short, an author’s rights are contingent on her ability to remember creating her work. This is the best justification because the author’s memories of creating the work satisfy all the requirements for authorial harm: it identifies discrete psychological states that are tied directly and only to the author’s acts of creation, independent of others’ perceptions. It is the least plausible, however, because it conditions important rights on one’s ability to remember past actions. Despite its seeming implausibility, the author’s memories of creation provide the best support for grounding monastic moral rights. As a consequence, the case for monastic moral rights, if it can be made, is tightly limited to cases where another’s use of an author’s work causes a negative psychological response directly tied to the author’s memories of creating the work.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Michael Byers (PhD Cantab) is Professor of Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia. He also co-directs the Outer Space Institute, a global network of space experts united by their commitment to highly innovative, transdisciplinary research that addresses grand challenges facing the continued use and exploration of space. Dr. Byers has been a Junior Research Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University; Professor of Law at Duke University; and a Visiting Professor at the universities of Cape Town, Tel Aviv, Nord (Norway), Novosibirsk (Russia), St Andrews, and the Geneva Graduate Institute. His two most recent books, both published by Cambridge University Press, are International Law and the Arctic and Who Owns Outer Space?

Chair: Prof Lorand Bartels, Centre Fellow

The Friday Lunchtime Lecture series is kindly supported by Cambridge University Press & Assessment.

Biography: Niamh Dunne is a professor at the Law School of the London School of Economics, where she teaches and researches in competition law.

Abstract: Is it possible to reconcile the competing visions of what constitutes ‘effective’ abuse of dominance enforcement that emerge from the contemporary jurisprudence of the Commission and the Court of Justice? Article 102 has been a focal point for efforts both to modernise but also to render more effective the application of EU competition law, with different strands of recent case law emphasising the pursuit of market efficiency, the protection of equality of market access, and the prevention of exploitation by dominant undertakings. This presentation will explore the coherence of these developments, and consider whether this question matters in light of the Commission’s stated objective of achieving ‘a robust enforcement’ of Article 102.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

In recent years, more than 80% of new housing estates developed by large housebuilders include amenities that are not adopted by the relevant statutory bodies. As a result, roads, public play areas, drainage systems, and other shared facilities are maintained by private management companies, with the costs passed on to homeowners. Yet, as Lord Templeman famously observed in Rhone v Stephens (1994), every student of real property law learns at an early stage that positive covenants affecting freehold land do not run with the land and are enforceable only against the original covenantor. How, then, are successive homeowners made to contribute to these ongoing obligations?

This lecture examines the 'ways and means' employed by conveyancers to ensure that such covenants bind successors in title and evaluates whether these mechanisms achieve satisfactory outcomes, both in terms of legal effectiveness and their broader implications for contemporary notions of homeownership.

Timings:

1. Professor Graham Virgo - Introduction: 00:00
2. Professor Susan Bright: 01:31

The XXIV Old Buildings Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest of the Cambridge Private Law Centre, and the event is sponsored by XXIV Old Buildings.

More information about this lecture is available from the Private Law Centre website:

https://www.privatelaw.law.cam.ac.uk/events

An expert in international law and its subfields, including legal history and international criminal law, Diane Marie Amann has served as Regents’ Professor, Emily & Ernest Woodruff Chair in International Law, and Faculty Co-Director of the Dean Rusk International Law Center at the University of Georgia School of Law, and is an Academic Affiliate at University College London Faculty of Laws. She was Special Adviser to International Criminal Court Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda on Children in & affected by Armed Conflict, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and has held leadership posts in the American and European societies of international law. Amann is writing an Oxford University Press book about lawyers and other women professionals at the first Nuremberg trial.

Biography: Christopher Stothers is a partner at Freshfields in London and Dublin and an experienced patent litigator, managing strategic, cross-border disputes around Europe and beyond for over 20 years. He has acted as a legal practitioner in many oppositions and appeals before the European Patent Office and as a UPC Representative in several local divisions and the Court of Appeal. He supervised IP students at Downing and St Catharine’s between 2004-2007, and since then has taught part-time at UCL where he is an Honorary Professor of Practice.

Abstract: International patent law has undergone piecemeal harmonisation over many years, from WIPO’s Paris Convention of 1883 through the Strasbourg Convention of 1963, the Patent Cooperation Treaty of 1970, the European Patent Convention of 1973, the (never ratified) Community Patent Conventions of 1975 and 1989, the TRIPS Agreement of 1994, the London Agreement of 2000 and the UPC Agreement of 2013. Despite these efforts, patent porfolios are typically still maintained and enforced on a strategic territorial basis, which in bigger cases often leads to cross-border disputes, particularly over standard essential patents and important pharmaceutical patents. The last decade has seen the re-emergence of cross-border enforcement by courts, including retaliatory anti-suit, anti-anti-suit, anti-enforcement and now anti-interim licence injunctions. Christopher has been involved in cross-border patent enforcement for over 20 years and will talk about the changes he has seen (and what is coming in the future).

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Abstract: The effectiveness of corporate restructuring plans largely relies on solutions shared as widely as possible among relevant stakeholders. This explains the worldwide spread of procedures that presuppose a negotiation phase and the attainment of genuine agreements among all stakeholders involved, or at least among the majority of them. However, following Directive (EU) 2019/1023, the widespread introduction of cross-class cram-down mechanisms and more flexible value-allocation rules (the Relative Priority Rule), has profoundly altered the incentives that structure these negotiations. Through a comparative analysis of the main European systems, the paper shows that these tools - originally conceived to prevent opportunistic holdouts - often weaken the search for genuinely consensual solutions and encourage the formation of narrow negotiating coalitions that ultimately impose their preferred outcomes on dissenting creditors. This paper seeks to highlight the modern paradox (the so-called “imposed bargain”) represented by the spread of imposed plans and to investigate the motivations that are likely driving the growing reliance on non-consensual tools for resolving corporate distress.

Luca Sicignano is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Business Law at the University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli” and a Lecturer in Business Law at the University of Naples “L’Orientale”. He graduated from Luiss “Guido Carli” University in Rome in 2017, where he currently serves as a Teaching Assistant. In 2022, he obtained a Ph.D. in Business Law and was admitted to the Italian Bar following a judicial clerkship at the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Court of Appeal of Rome. He has held visiting research positions at the University of Cambridge, the University of Vienna, and the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg, and has undertaken repeated research stays at the Institute for Comparative Law of Heidelberg University. During the academic year 2023–2024, he served as a Lecturer at Heidelberg University, teaching Introduction to Italian Company Law. His research focuses on Business Law, with particular emphasis on corporate, financial and insolvency law. He has authored over 25 publications in Italian and international journals and has presented his research at conferences in Dublin and Dubrovnik. He serves on the editorial board of Banca, Borsa e Titoli di Credito and is a member of the European Law Institute (ELI) and the Young Scholars section of the European Society for Banking and Financial Law (AEDBF).

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Dr Natalie Klein is Associate Dean (Academic) and a Professor at UNSW Sydney’s Faculty of Law & Justice, Australia. Professor Klein teaches and researches in different areas of international law, focusing on law of the sea. She was a Visiting Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre in 2008 when she was working on Maritime Security and the Law of the Sea (OUP). She is co-author, with Kate Purcell and Jack McNally, of a forthcoming monograph, Submarines in International Law (CUP).

There is a sandwich lunch at 12.30 pm in the Old Library at the Centre. All lecture attendees welcome.

Chair: Prof Markus Gehring

The Friday Lunchtime Lecture series is kindly supported by Cambridge University Press & Assessment.

Biography: Morten Rasmussen is Associate Professor at the SAXO Institute, University of Copenhagen and a leading expert on the legal histories of European integration and the League of Nations. He has published numerous articles and book chapters on these topics. The most recent publication is a general history of early period of European Union Law from 1950 to 1993. He is currently co-editing a Cambridge Handbook of the League of Nations and international law.

Abstract: Professor Rasmussen will present on his forthcoming publication 'The History of European Union Law - Constitutional Practice, 1950 to 1993'. The formative period of EU law witnessed an intense struggle over the emergence of a constitutional practice. While the supranational institutions, including the European Commission, the European Court of Justice and the European Parliament, as well as EU law academics helped to develop and promote the constitutional practice, member state governments and judiciaries were generally reluctant to embrace it. The struggle resulted in an uneasy stalemate in which the constitutional practice was allowed to influence the doctrines, shape and functioning of the European legal order that now underpins the EU, but a majority of member state governments rejected European constitutionalism as the legitimating principle of the new EU formed on basis of the Treaty of Maastricht (1992). The lecture traces the struggle and accounts for eventual stalemate over the constitutional practice and the fragile and partial system of rule of law that exists in the EU today.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Lord David Richards is a Justice of the UK Supreme Court and a Cambridge law alumnus. He was called to the Bar in 1974, took Silk in 1992, and practised primarily in company law and corporate insolvency. He served as a High Court Judge (Chancery Division), chaired the Competition Appeal Tribunal, and was a Lord Justice of Appeal from 2015 to 2021. Appointed to the Supreme Court in 2022, Lord Richards has also sat on the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and continues to work as an arbitrator and legal expert. He is a Bencher of Lincoln’s Inn and served as its Treasurer in 2020–21.

He discusses his career from the Chancery Bar all the way to the Supreme Court, and he reflects on some of the interesting cases he has worked on.

The lecture begins at 04:02

For more information see the CULS website at: https://culs.org.uk

Abstract: Sustainability-oriented investors want to pay for impact, not compliance. We analyse the regulatory challenges and opportunities of impact investing. We find that advancing impact investing requires a departure from the EU Sustainable Finance Framework's (EUSFF) prevailing input-orientation and an adjustment of EU asset-management law towards an EU Impact Finance Framework.

In its current form, the EUSFF over-emphasises exclusion, using rule-based ex ante definitions of sustainable business (herein termed input). If a large share of global capital follows these rules, unsustainable firms’ capital costs will increase, furthering innovation of sustainable alternatives. However, the EUSFF alone cannot prevent global capital flows into unsustainable investments, and non-EU countries follow different approaches. Although the EUSFF encourages, in effect, the sale of unsustainable EU businesses to non-EU firms, its input orientation has not helped the planet: the same activities continue elsewhere, often under weaker environmental and social standards, leaving the planet worse off. Further, the EUSFF’s disregard for proven ex post impacts risks large-scale capital misallocation and “impact washing”. Worse, the input focus comes at the cost of investments paired with audited evidence of positive ESG impacts ex post.

We argue for shifting EU financial regulation from input to (proven) impact. Yet, rather than adding a new product category, we propose recognising positive impacts through five fine-tuned steps that simplify EU financial regulation, taking into account regulatory developments in the United Kingdom and Switzerland. These include abolishing the link between “do no significant harm” under the Taxonomy Regulation and the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation, simplified reporting aligned with product materials and the emerging IFRS Disclosure Standards, introducing a new proportionality threshold for mid-sized AIFMs, and revising ESMA’s rules on fund names.

Professor Zetzsche is Professor of Financial Law at the University of Luxembourg where he has held the ADA Chair in Financial Law (inclusive finance) since March 2016 and functions as the Head of the Department of Law since 2024. He is also coordinator of the Faculty of Law, Economics and Finance's House of Sustainable Governance & Markets and Co-PI of the Future FinTech National Centre of Excellence in Research and Innovation.

Professor Zetzsche has published more than 400 publications on inclusive and sustainable finance, corporate governance, FinTech and RegTech, and collective investment schemes. He has spoken at most of the leading universities globally and has advised many of the major regulators, eg the FSB, the BIS, the Basel Committee, the European Commission, the European Parliament, ESMA, EBA, the ESRB and the US SEC. In February 2023, he made the case for financial inclusion at the United Nations Social Commission, and spoke on inclusive and sustainable finance at COP27, 28, 29 and 30.

Professor Zetzsche's paper Towards an EU Impact Investing Framework is available on SSRN.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Lecture summary: Stories serve an integral role in society as, among other things, a meaning making tool. As a method of meaning making, stories are relational and allow the storyteller to assist their audience in understanding ideas, concepts, and experiences that lie beyond their lived experiences. Using this understanding and starting point, I ask what happens if we read international law as an iterative archive of stories about global society? I will start by exploring the meaning making function that storytelling serves in society, and then consider how international law, be it treaties, custom, case law or other legal instruments, can be read as official stories of the society that produced them.

Tamsin Phillipa Paige is an Associate Professor with Deakin Law School. Her work is interdisciplinary in nature, using qualitative sociological methods to analyse international law (with a focus on application of law and the impact it has on society). She also does law and literature research using popular fiction to understand social perceptions of the law. Her work has examined (among other things) Somali piracy, UN Security Council decision making, the impact of international law on queer lives, and conflict based sexual violence. In a former life, she was a French trained, fine dining pâtissière.

Chair: Dr Lena Holzer, Centre Fellow

This lecture was delivered on 20 February 2026 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series.

Biography: Halvard Haukeland Fredriksen is professor of European law at the University of Bergen, Norway. Besides his Norwegian law degree, he holds the degrees of Mag.Jur. and Dr.Jur. from the University of Göttingen (Germany) as well as a PhD from the University of Bergen. Member of the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters. Co-Director of the Bergen Centre of the Europeanization of Norwegian law. Editor-in-chief of the Norwegian Law Journal. Member of the 2022-2024 ‘EEA Review Committee’ that assed Norway’s current affiliation to the European Union.

Abstract: For more than three decades, the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) has integrated Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway into the better part of the EU internal market. Over the years, the Agreement has been supplemented by numerous other agreements between Norway and the EU, creating a complex patchwork of agreements commonly referred to as ‘the Norway model’. Notwithstanding the model’s democratic problems, the general view in Norway is that it has worked well as a compromise between those in favour of membership of the Union and those very much opposed to this idea. However, the EU’s strive for ‘strategic autonomy’ in the current geopolitical situation makes it more complicated to remain part of the internal market without being part of the customs union and the common commercial policy. The seminar will discuss the legal challenges confronting ‘the Norway model’ as well as possible remedies.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Lecture summary: In the last several decades, scholarly views of due diligence in international law have shifted from due diligence as a primary obligation under customary international law, to due diligence as a standard of conduct attached to a primary obligation. Thus, for example, due diligence is required to meet a State’s obligation of protection (of the environment) or of prevention (of genocide). The International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion on Climate Change adopted such an articulation and stated that due diligence is a standard of conduct and States have a duty to prevent significant harm to the environment by acting with due diligence. The Court not only reinforced the importance of the customary international law obligation not to cause significant harm to the environment but placed this within the ‘no harm’ principle, as expressed in the Corfu Channel case. However, the Court did not expressly articulate whether there was a broader obligation of due diligence that applies not only to the prevention of environmental harm, but also to the prevention of other harms to the rights and interests of States. Due diligence is thus as a crossroads. Has the ICJ essentially sought to bridge the gap between on the one hand the notion of due diligence as an obligation on a State not to permit activities subject to its jurisdiction or control which causes harm to the rights and interests of other States, and on the other hand the notion of due diligence as a standard of conduct attached to a primary obligation? Has the Court opened the door to finding a general customary international law obligation not to cause harm to the rights and interests of other States? Or has it confined due diligence to its status as a standard of conduct attached to a primary obligation? This lecture will discuss this pivotal point which is central to the elucidation of the foundation and scope of the due diligence obligation under international law.

Dr Penelope Ridings is a Member of the International Law Commission and New Zealand Barrister practising in the field of public international law. In 2025 she was appointed the ILC Special Rapporteur for the topic ‘Due Diligence in International Law’. She was formerly New Zealand’s Chief International Legal Adviser in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and a New Zealand diplomat. She was Agent for New Zealand before the International Court of Justice in Whaling in the Antarctic: Australia v Japan, New Zealand Intervening and before the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea in the Request for an Advisory Opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission.

After moving to the New Zealand Bar, she has advised governments and international organisations on public international law including law of the sea, fisheries, environmental law, trade and investment, international security and international dispute settlement. She was Chair of the 2025 arbitration under the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (UK-Sandeel) and Chair of the WTO appeal arbitration China – Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights under the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement. She has served on several ICSID ad hoc Annulment Committees, including as Chair, and as an independent panellist in disputes before the WTO. She has lectured in international law and contributed to several books and written articles on various aspects of international law.

This lecture was delivered on 13 February 2026 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series.

Biography: Dr Svitlana Lebedenko specialises in innovation and industrial policy, law and technology, and intellectual property law. She is currently an Assistant Professor in the School of Law at the University of Warwick and a part-time Assistant Professor at the European University Institute, contributing to the Global Governance Programme of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. Previously, she was a Hauser Global Fellow at New York University School of Law's Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy, a Max Weber Fellow at the European University Institute, a Research Fellow at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, and a Visiting Research Fellow at the University of Copenhagen's Center for Advanced Studies in Bioscience Innovation Law. Her first book, Russian Innovation and Intellectual Property: From Communism to Capitalism, is forthcoming with Cambridge University Press in 2026.

Abstract: Intellectual property has mainly been studied from the institutional and systems perspectives. While both have produced useful insights, neither really explains the spread of intellectual property, which, despite its numerous institutional failures, has never been rolled back. The talk introduces a technology perspective on intellectual property to provide a macro-level explanation of this phenomenon of resilience. Two propositions arise from conceptualising intellectual property as a technology. First, the efficiency and neutrality theses of technology serve as intellectual property anchors. Second, the evolutionary nature of technology means that changes to the tools of knowledge governance that may occur are likely to be bound by the limits of the dominant technological (intellectual property) paradigm. The talk will conclude by considering the descriptive and normative value of this technology perspective.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Abstract: The increasing use of AI in finance is predicted to have mixed impact on financial stability: while AI can be used to help financial institutions and supervisors identify, manage, and monitor systemic risk, it can also increase the frequency and severity of crises by exacerbating existing vulnerability channels. Under the UK’s technology-agnostic approach to AI, algorithmic technologies are primarily governed through existing sectoral frameworks rather than bespoke regulation. I argue that this approach might be insufficient to mitigate their negative impact on financial stability. The features that separate AI from other technologies—opacity, autonomy, and adaptability—make existing regulatory frameworks and architectures a poor fit for tackling the financial systemic risk created by AI. Disclosure rules are undermined by ‘black box’ opacity and the unpredictability of autonomous algorithm-algorithm interactions, while ex-ante testing struggles to predict endogenous risks arising from those interactions and their systemic impact. Crucially, model risk management and operational resilience frameworks, often calibrated for acute disruptions and focused on individual firms, are ill-equipped to ensure systemic resilience when AI models drift in similar ways. The article concludes that mitigating the risks of AI for financial stability calls for a purposeful change towards specialised algorithmic governance rules, and a review of supervision and enforcement practices.

Dr Clara Martins Pereira is Associate Professor of Financial Law and Director for International Development at Durham Law School, Invited Professor at Católica Lisbon School of Law, and Global Associate Professor of Law at the University of Notre Dame. Her research focuses on financial law and regulation, technological innovation, and sustainable development. Clara holds a DPhil, MPhil, and Magister Juris from the University of Oxford, as well as an MSc in Law and Business and an LLB from Católica Lisbon. She has held academic roles at King’s College London, the University of Oxford, and the LSE, and served as a Visiting Scholar at Columbia Law School, Sapienza University of Rome, and the Max Planck Institute, among others. Formerly a capital markets lawyer at PLMJ, she has also acted as a consultant for organisations such as the World Bank and ICF.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Lecture summary: The lecture explores the systemic function of general principles in international law in light of the ongoing work of the ILC on general principles of law and recent practice of international courts and tribunals, such as the Climate Change Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice from 2025. In its first part, the lecture examines the ILC’s approach to the systemic function of general principles and comments of states on the ILC’s work. In its second and third part, the lecture discusses the two main features of the systemic function of general principles, namely their contribution to inter-norm and inter-systemic coherence in international law. All general principles potentially fulfil a systemic function by their gap-filling role and inter-systemic communication through Article 38(1)(c) ICJ Statute. Several general principles have a systemic pull in inter-norm contexts as interpretative guidelines and inter-norm harmonisers and coordinators. In the relationship between different (sub)orders of international law (including European law and national legal orders applying international law), several principles provide for ‘hinge’ mechanisms and inter-system harmonisers which open legal (sub)orders to one another, and integrate them into (relative) unity, while others serve as inter-system coordinators or mechanisms for conditional closure of legal orders. This means, all general principles have a systemic function, whereas certain principles have more direct systemic function by virtue of their normative content. Through their systemic function, general principles contribute as a central cohesive force furthering international law’s character as a legal and (relative) unitary system. This system is characterized by a complex and dynamic interplay between a plurality of legal norms, orders, and sub-orders, including national legal orders, through systemic principles of openness, coordination, and conditional closure.

Chair: Prof Campbell McLachlan

This lecture was given on 6 February 2026 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series at the Lauterpacht Centre.

Biography: Dr Poorna Mysoor is a Fellow in Law at Lucy Cavendish College, University of Cambridge. She was a Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellow at Oxford Law Faculty. She is the author of two books, Copyright as Personal Property (2025) and Implied Licences in Copyright Law (2021), both published with Oxford University Press, and of other peer reviewed journals articles. Poorna obtained her undergraduate law degree at NLSIU, Bangalore, LLM from SOAS, University of London and DPhil from Oxford Law Faculty. Before embarking on her doctorate, Poorna practised intellectual property law for several years in Hong Kong and was a litigator in India.

Abstract: Many scholars argue that recognising copyright as a property right leads to expansion. The argument is that property rights empower the owners disproportionately with little regard to the interests of other stakeholders. In this presentation the speaker seeks not only to debunk this argument to show instead the limiting role played by property rights and its impact on copyright. Drawing from her recently published monograph, ‘Copyright as Personal Property’ the speaker will put forward relevant analogies from land law and personal property law in support of her arguments. She seeks to demonstrate tat copyright expansion can indeed be reined in by adopting, and not disregarding, the property framework in the characterisation of copyright.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

We explore how his early experiences shaped his vision of law as a force for social good, the story behind The Law Corner’s founding, and how it has grown into a pro bono hub that now partners with Cambridge Law Faculty to give students real-world legal experience while supporting under-served communities.

Nabil also shares insights from his academic work on access to justice and human rights, including his research on the right to legal advice under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Follow us on our socials to stay up to date with all things CULS:

📸 Instagram: [@cambridgelawsociety]

📘 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/camlawsoc/?locale=en_GB

To find out more about CULS or to become a member, visit our website 📝

In this talk, Jon Penney explores key themes from his new book Chilling Effects: Repression, Conformity, and Power in the Digital Age (Cambridge University Press, 2025), which examines the increasing weaponization of surveillance, censorship, and new technology to repress and control us. With corporations, governments, and extremists employing big data, artificial intelligence, FRT, cyber-mobs, and other technological threats to limit our rights and freedoms, concerns about chilling effects—or how these activities deter us from exercising our rights—have become urgent. Penney draws on law, privacy theory, and social science to present a new conformity theory that highlights the dangers of chilling effects and their potential to erode democracy and enable a more illiberal future. Following the book’s urgent and timely message, he sheds light on the repressive and conforming effects of technology, state, and corporate power and offers a roadmap of how to respond to their weaponization today and tomorrow.

Biography: Jon Penney is a legal scholar and social scientist at Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto, where he is an Associate Professor and holds the York Research Chair in Artificial Intelligence, Data Governance, and the Law. He is also a Faculty Associate at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society and Senior Research Fellow at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab. His award-winning research on privacy, technology, and human rights has received national and international attention, including coverage in the Washington Post, the New York Times, Reuters International, The Guardian, and Le Monde, among others, and has been profiled in WIRED and Harvard Magazine.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Biography: Timothy Pitt-Payne KC is a leading information law silk based at 11KBW where he has practiced since 1990. He was appointed QC/KC in 2010. His information law practice involves both litigation and advisory work in data protection, freedom of information, access to environmental information, RIPA, human rights issues, privacy, and breach of confidence. His clients have included commercial organisations, the Information Commissioner, numerous regulators, NHS bodies, local authorities, Universities, and private individuals. He has extensive advocacy experience in information law, at all levels from the First-tier Tribunal to the Supreme Court. In addition to information law, he is also active in both public law and employment law.

Abstract: Article 22 of the UK GDPR prohibits certain forms of decision-making based solely on automated processing of personal data. This presentation considers the significance, scope, meaning and justification of Article 22 (as recently amended by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025). It argues that the provision should remain as part of the UK GDPR, although its scope may require modification. The provision is an outlier within the UK GDPR, in that it is focused specifically on decision-making, rather than on the full range of ways in which personal data can be processed. It applies to decision-makers in both the public and private sector. Much of the debate about the implications of automated decision-making has been focused on decision-making by judges or by public authorities; Article 22 is much wider in scope, with extensive impact on the private sector. I address some of the interpretative difficulties raised by Article 22. For instance, what minimum level of human involvement is required by Article 22? To what extent are any interpretative difficulties resolved by the recent amendments? In relation to the justification for Article 22, I assess possible arguments based on transparency, bias, responsiveness to individual circumstances, and risks of error. I argue that the most convincing justification is based on non-consequentialist arguments broadly relating to human dignity, founded on claims about inherent differences between human and machine capabilities.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) remains one of the most significant instruments of human rights protection in Europe. Yet in the United Kingdom, its place in the constitutional order is increasingly contested. Political debate has raised questions about the appropriateness of the ECHR's reach, its domestic incorporation through the Human Rights Act 1998, and the proper balance between parliamentary sovereignty and Strasbourg supervision.

The aim of this roundtable was to bring together Cambridge academics to consider possible trajectories for reform and the mechanisms to achieve this. The discussion provided a space not only for doctrinal and legal analysis but also for assessing political realities and potential path. The roundtable started from the perspective that there is a perception, very strong in some quarters, that the ECHR is not fit for purpose.

Chair: Catherine Barnard

1. Nabil Khabirpour
2. Jan Klabbers
3. Marcus Gehring

Chair: Sandesh Sivakumaran

1. Darren Peterson
2. Stevie Martin

For further information:

CELS: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/

CPL: https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/

LCIL: https://www.lcil.cam.ac.uk/

Lauri Mälksoo is Professor of International Law at the University of Tartu in Estonia. He is member of the Institut de Droit International, of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe and of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. He has published two monographs on the history and theory of international law in Russia and the Soviet Union at the Oxford University Press.

Chair: Prof Marc Weller

This lecture was given on 30 January 2026 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series at the Lauterpacht Centre.

No lecture summary available.

Chair: Prof Jan Klabbers

This lecture was given on 23 January 2026 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series at the Lauterpacht Centre.

An all‑stars of land law, joined by Lorna Fox‑O’Mahony, Lorren Eldridge, Martin Dixon, and David Sawtell, this episode explores 100 years of the Law of Property Act and its enduring impact.

Since its passage in 1925, the Law of Property Act (LPA) has been one of the cornerstones of English land law — simplifying centuries-old rules, reorganising property interests, and laying the groundwork for modern conveyancing and ownership frameworks. In our discussion, we delve into the Act’s foundational simplification of land ownership, the balance between legal and equitable rights, the evolution of statutory mortgages and formalities, and contemporary debates around leasehold, digital formality, and whether the LPA’s structure remains fit for the 21st century.

Hoping you all had a very merry Christmas and wishing you all a Happy New Year — see you in 2026!

In this episode, Janice speaks to Dr Poorna Mysoor on her book Copyright as Personal Property (Oxford University Press, 2025). The book challenges the traditional view of copyright as merely a statutory right and argues instead that it should be understood more like personal property — drawing analogies with land and tangible property to explore how copyright operates, how its boundaries can be better justified, and how its expansion might be meaningfully contained.

Dr Poorna Mysoor is a Fellow in Law at Lucy Cavendish College and an affiliated lecturer at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge. Her research lies at the intersection of private law and intellectual property, and she was previously a Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellow at the University of Oxford.

Follow us on our socials to stay up to date with all things CULS:

📸 Instagram: [@cambridgelawsociety]

📘 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/camlawsoc/?locale=en_GB

To find out more about CULS or to become a member, visit our website 📝

Speakers:

• Junayed Ahmed CHOWDHURY, Vertex Chambers, Bangladesh
• Megumi HARA, Chuo University, Japan
• Parawee KASITINON, Thammasat University, Thailand
• Debanshu MUKHERJEE, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, India
• Huyen PHAM, International Finance Corporation, Vietnam
• Griselda (Gay) G. SANTOS, Financial Inclusion Advocate, Philippines
• Aria SUYUDI, Indonesia Jentera School of Law, Indonesia
• Lebing WANG, Law School of University of International Business and Economics, China

The edited volume of essays Secured Transactions Law in Asia: Principles, Perspectives and Reform (Hart Publishing, 2021) provided an in-depth exploration of secured transactions law in thirteen civil law and common law jurisdictions in Asia. A varied picture emerged. While the law in some jurisdictions had already been reformed to conform largely with the principles reflected in modern personal property security statutes and international codifications such as the UNCITRAL Model Law on Secured Transactions, there were jurisdictions that were in the process of undergoing secured transactions law reform, as well as those in which no particular attention was being paid to reforming the law.

In this webinar, the editors of the volume, Professor Louise Gullifer and Associate Professor Dora Neo, bring together some of its contributors for an update of significant developments in secured transactions law that have taken place since its publication. Jurisdictions that are discussed include China, Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Bangladesh and India.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Lord (John) Hendy KC and Councillor Nick Denys from the Law Society shared their insights on the parliamentary process, the merits (and weaknesses) of the ERB, and its (practical) future once it is voted into law.

The development of this rather complex piece of legislation has been complicated and the interaction between the Lords and the Commons intense.

Professor Catherine Barnard chaired the session, with an additional contribution from Dr Fotis Vergis.

Chair: Professor Catherine Barnard, University of Cambridge 

Discussants: 

• Professor Markus Gehring, University of Cambridge
• Dr Emilija Leinarte, University of Cambridge
• Professor Daniel Sarmiento, Universidad Complutense, Madrid
• Dr Martin Steinfeld, University of Cambridge 
• Professor Takis Tridimas, Luxembourg Centre for European Law (LCEL) 

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Abstract: Despite the influence of the Global North in many insolvency laws and practices in the Global South, this article shows that the Global South has innovated in many aspects of insolvency law. In some cases, these innovations consist of solutions that, with certain adjustments, have been imported from the Global North. In others, they are really ‘autochthonous innovations’ from the Global South. This article identifies both types of innovations, providing examples from jurisdictions such as Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Myanmar, Peru, Philippines, Thailand and Uruguay. More importantly, it will be shown how those innovations from the Global South can help mitigate certain problems existing in many insolvency systems in the Global North, such as the excessive power of DIP lenders often observed in the United States, the lengthy and inefficient insolvency proceedings found in many European countries, the unattractive insolvency regime for debtors existing in countries like Australia and New Zealand, and the stigma of insolvency still observed in most jurisdictions around the world, including advanced economies with sophisticated insolvency frameworks such as Singapore. Therefore, whether it is for the much-needed purpose of improving the design of insolvency law in the Global South, or at least for expanding the universe of ideas that can help improve many insolvency systems in the Global North, the Global South – and the Global South beyond India and China – needs to be more actively included in the study of insolvency law. Otherwise, we will be missing the opportunity to learn from many ideas and innovative solutions that can contribute to the improvement and understanding of insolvency systems around the world.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Lecture summary: Is international law facing a decline of treaties?

In recent years, several authoritative voices have pointed out certain developments which seem to indicate that States are shifting away from treaty law-making for the governance of their international relations.

Taking as a starting point the sociological concept of “liquid modernity” introduced by Zygmunt Bauman, this lecture will explore how treaties, archetypes of solid and stable law-making, have reacted to an unstable global community where norms seem to be eroding and long-term commitments appear to be challenged.

As the lecture will show, there is no doubt that the law and practice of treaties have evolved to adapt to a shifting international environment, but the news about the death of treaties is greatly exaggerated. 

The Eli Lauterpacht Lecture was established after Sir Eli's death in 2017 to celebrate his life and work. This lecture takes place on a Friday at the Centre at the start of the Michaelmas Term in any academic year.

These lectures are kindly supported by Dr and Mrs Ivan Berkowitz who are Principal Benefactors of the Centre.

The lecture begins at: 07:27

The Sir David Williams Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest lecturer in honour of Sir David Williams, Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of English Law and Emeritus Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University.

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for Public Law website at:

https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/sir-david-williams-lectures

Abstract: The seminar, building upon Professor Gallo’s book, Direct Effect in EU Law (EU Law Library Series, OUP, 2025), will explore the uneasy trajectories of a transformative doctrine such as direct effect. By reassessing both the present and future of this legal and political construct, it will argue that such chameleon-like principle has evolved into a broader legal category than it was at the outset of the European integration process and that this development has been only partially captured by the CJEU. In doing so, Professor Gallo will revisit the no horizontal direct effect rule of contemporary directives and argue for its overcoming in light of the text, scope, and objectives of legal acts that are substantially different from those envisaged by Article 288 TFEU.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

This event was held by the Cambridge University Human Rights Law Society (CUHRLS) and Clare Politics Society, who hosted renowned human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, best known for his decades-long work with LGBTQ+ and other global social justice movements which has shaped contemporary activism. Peter discussed the rising tide of the far right and why progressive politics has struggled to stem this tide and safeguard human rights in response.

Peter Tatchell is one of the UK’s best-known human rights campaigners, with more than fifty years of work across LGBTQ+ rights, anti-racism, democracy, and social justice. Throughout his career he has taken on governments and institutions around the world, often using bold direct action to highlight abuses and push for reform: he helped found ‘OutRage!' in the 1990s and most recently leads the Peter Tatchell Foundation.

For more on Clare Politics Society see their Instgram page. For CUHRLS see their Instagram page.

The Centre for English Legal History (CELH) was formally established in 2016 to provide a hub for researchers working in legal history across the University of Cambridge. The Centre holds regular seminars during academic terms, and an annual centrepiece lecture.

To find out more, and download the accompanying presentation, please refer to:

http://www.celh.law.cam.ac.uk/lectures

Even in the context of the future EU Omnibus Package and the EU Directive n°2025/794 of 14 April 2025 'Stop-the-Clock', Companies and there directors must face an increasing climate litigation and this change cannot go back 20 years of progress in Sustainable Corporate Governance which is on the way on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean and in Asia. Indeed, the European Commission has been releasing innovative and often complex regulations at a breakneck speed since 2018 (CSRD, CS3D, Taxonomy, to name a few) and it would be inconceivable to come back to 2001 at the time of the first European Recommendation on CSR and to ignore the EU Green Deal of 2019.

Directors have to take into account negatives externalities and stringent obligations such as the Transition Plans. Even if the the next generation of sustainable board directors is well aware of Climate risks, several questions may arise : is there a need to reshape the board despite the EU Directive WoB Women in board of 23 November 2022? What about the pressure of the Stakeholders and the pressure of the Sustainable Strategy ? In France, in the wake of the Due Diligence Law of 27 March 2017, climate litigation is also increasing (for example TotalEnergies, CA Paris, 18 June 2024) and France was the first State Member for having implemented the CSRD in December 2023. Didn't all this happen too quickly ? Can we stop European time when tackling Climate change is rather a race against time? La Fontaine famous fable " the Hare and the Tortoise" is full of wisdom.

Biography: Catherine Malecki is Professor of Private Law Rennes 2 University France and Member of the IUF (Institut universitaire de France) Fundamental Chair.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Biography: Lilian Edwards is a leading academic in the field of Internet law. She has taught information technology law, e-commerce law, privacy law and Internet law at undergraduate and postgraduate level since 1996 and been involved with law and artificial intelligence (AI) since 1985. She is now Emerita Professor at Newcastle and Honorary Professor at CREAte, University of Glasgow, which she helped co-found. She is the editor and major author of Law, Policy and the Internet, one of the leading textbooks in the field of Internet law (Hart, 2018, new edition forthcoming with Urquhart and Goanta, 2026). She won the Future of Privacy Forum award in 2019 for best paper ("Slave to the Algorithm" with Michael Veale) and the award for best non-technical paper at FAccT in 2020, on automated hiring. In 2004 she won the Barbara Wellberry Memorial Prize in 2004 for work on online privacy where she invented the notion of data trusts, a concept which ten years later has been proposed in EU legislation. She is a former fellow of the Alan Turing Institute on Law and AI, and the Institute for the Future of Work. Edwards has consulted for inter alia the EU Commission, the OECD, and WIPO.

Abstract: The right to an explanation is having another moment. Well after the heyday of 2016-2018 when scholars tussled over whether the GDPR ( in either art 22 or arts 13-15) conferred a right to explanation, the CJEU case of Dun and Bradstreet has finally confirmed its existence, and the Platform Work Directive has wholesale revamped art 22 in its Algorithmic Management chapter. Most recently the EU AI Act added its own Frankenstein-like right to an explanation (art 86) of AI systems .

None of these provisions however pin down what the essence of the explanation should be, given many notions can be invoked here ; a faithful description of source code or training data; an account that enables challenge or contestation; a “plausible” description that may be appealing in a behaviouralist sense but might be actually misleading when operationalised eg to generate a medical course of treatment. Agarwal et al argue that the tendency of UI designers, and regulators and judges alike to lean towards the plausibility end, may be unsuited to large language models which represent far more of a black box in size and optimisation than conventional machine learning, and which are trained to present encouraging but not always accurate accounts of their workings. Yet this is also the direction of travel taken by CJEU Dun & Bradstreet , above. This paper argues that explanations of large model outputs may present novel challenges needing thoughtful legal mandates.

For more information (and to download slides) see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

This book is a comprehensive yet practical guide to human rights law in the UK. Rooted in the European Convention on Human Rights but also grounded in the enduring relevance of common law traditions, it brings together a team of 32 practitioners experts (many from Landmark Chambers) to deliver both legal analysis and actionable insight.

Alistair Mills is the Dias College Assistant Professor in Law at Magdalene College, Cambridge. Before joining academia full time, he practised as a barrister at Landmark Chambers. He is a Co-Editor of the journal Judicial Review and an Assistant Editor of the Encyclopedia of Planning Law and Practice.

Follow us on our socials to stay up to date with all things CULS:

📸 Instagram: [@cambridgelawsociety]

📘 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/camlawsoc/?locale=en_GB

To find out more about CULS or to become a member, visit our website 📝

The Hamlyn Lectures are normally delivered in the autumn and the annual Hamlyn Seminar, which marks the publication of the lecture, is usually held in London in the following spring.

The lecture was on the title: 'The Paradoxes of Property: What do we Own and What can we Own?'

For more about the Hamlyn Lectures see: https://law.exeter.ac.uk/about/thehamlyntrust/lectures/

Abstract: EU anti-discrimination law has been a subject of choice for critiques from various disciplines. One influential motif that has durably structured the critical analysis of EU anti-discrimination law is the distinction between formal and substantive equality. Substantive approaches seek to diagnose and remedy the disjunctions between formal equality frameworks and social realities. Yet, such critiques often remain implicit in their engagement with social theory, leaving the very notion and construction of ’social realities’ largely unexamined. This paper thus asks: How does the principle of non-discrimination mediate and produce specific forms of individual subjectivity, interpersonal relationships, institutional arrangements, material and spatial organisation and ultimately social order? How does it authorise the existence of certain subjects and groups while excluding and rendering others invisible? What 'forms of life' does EU anti-discrimination and its jurisprudential construction by the Court enable or preclude?

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

This presentation explores the external dimension of directors’ duties—whether directors can and should address climate impacts and other externalities even absent financial benefits to the company’s shareholders—in contrast to the shareholder value maximisation focus. Its significance stems from universal investors, the EU due diligence regime, and high emitting SOEs. I examine three arguments: UK nature clauses are constrained by shareholder primacy; US shareholder preference claims are undermined by financially driven activism; and SOE directors’ duties can align with state ownership (as shown in China).

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Kristina Daugirdas is the Francis A. Allen Collegiate Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School. She teaches and writes primarily in the fields of international law and institutions.

Her scholarship currently focuses on international organizations, accountability mechanisms, and the ongoing evolution of the international legal system. She is a member of the editorial board of the International Organizations Law Review and the State Department’s Advisory Committee on International Law. She also serves as an adviser to the American Law Institute’s Restatement (Fourth) of Foreign Relations Law.

In 2016–2017, Daugirdas was a visiting fellow at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva and served as a consultant on public international law issues for the World Intellectual Property Organization. From 2014 to 2017, she co-authored the Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law: A section of the American Journal of International Law. In 2014, she was awarded the Francis Deák Prize for an outstanding article published in the American Journal of International Law by a younger author.

Daugirdas has taken on significant leadership roles at the law school, including serving as Associate Dean for Academic Programming from 2021 to 2024. She also led a subcommittee of the Advisory Committee on the University of Michigan Principles on Diversity of Thought and Freedom of Expression.

Prior to entering academia, Daugirdas was an attorney-adviser at the State Department’s Office of the Legal Adviser, receiving multiple honors for her service. As an attorney-adviser, she provided guidance on the negotiation and implementation of UN Security Council sanctions and amicus participation by the US government in lawsuits with foreign policy implications.

Chair: Prof Fernando Lusa Bordin

This lecture was given on 7 November 2025 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series at the Lauterpacht Centre.

Biography: Bhamati Viswanathan is a Senior Visitor at the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law and a Fellow (Non-Resident) at the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts at Columbia Law School (New York). Prior to joining the Cambridge Faculty of Law, she was Assistant Professor at New England Law | Boston, where she taught copyright law, artificial intelligence and the law, law and the visual arts, intellectual property law, and U.S. Constitutional law. She is the author of “Cultivating Copyright: How Creative Industries Can Harness Intellectual Property to Survive the Digital Age” (Routledge/Taylor & Francis Press). She currently holds an Edison Fellowship from the Intellectual Property Policy Institute at University of Akron Law School, under whose aegis she is writing a series of articles on the disparate impact of copyright law on women creators and women-centric work. She is also planning a book on the nexus of intellectual property and arts/culture in the age of artificial intelligence.

Bhamati serves as Chair of the American Bar Association Intellectual Property Section: Visual and Dramatics Works Committee. She is a Faculty Advisor on the Copyright Alliance Academic Advisory Board. She serves as Faculty Partner to the News/Media Alliance. She is Education Advisor to the Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts (VLA)/ Massachusetts Arts and Business Council. She is also a Faculty Advisor to the Journal of the Copyright Society; and she was a Trustee of the Copyright Society, as well as Chair of its New England Chapter. She holds an S.J.D./LL.M. from University of Pennsylvania Law School; a J.D. from University of Michigan Law School; and a B.A. from Williams College. She is a competitive figure skater, violinist, and published poet/translator and lives in Boston.

Abstract: The training of generativeAI models on ingested work is a hotly contested area of U.S. copyright law. In this Seminar, I will inquire whether such training may constitute “fair use” under the nonexclusive four-factor test of the U.S. Copyright Act. Currently, courts are wrestling with the fair use defense in several major cases, including Thompson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence; Bartz v. Anthropic; Kadrey v. Meta; and the consolidated litigation of In re: OpenAI.

Another open question is whether AI outputs infringe copyright in other works. Here, plaintiffs must establish that AI outputs infringe their works by passing the threshold of the “substantial similarity” test. I will discuss the test in the context of AI litigation, and will suggest that the relatively novel “market dilution” theory, focusing on harm caused by stylistically similar outputs, might be applied to weigh against a fair use defense for GenAI training. I will also address whether the theory of “vicarious liability” might be fruitfully brought to bear against certain genAI companies.

Lastly, I will ask what action Congress can, or should, take, with a view to striking a fair balance between meeting the needs of innovative technologies and securing the rights of creative industries and creators. As an example, I will raise a recent proposal (in which I was involved) that Congress explicitly prohibit GenAI training on materials derived from digital repositories of unlicensed materials (so-called “shadow libraries”).

For more information (and to download slides) see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

With the advancement of technology, delivery of financial services, such as payment services, can be achieved almost instantaneously. In the area of trade finance, however, banks have been less quick to harness technology for trade digitalisation. An important reason is that trade financing has historically been heavily dependent on the use of paper. While digitisation of trade documents is easily done, the digitalisation of trade finance requires a supportive legal framework to ensure that concepts like possession, which were developed in relation to tangible documents, can operate in the digital world. In the UK, this framework is now provided by the Electronic Trade Documents Act 2023 which has been described to be "one of the most important bills you have never heard of". Singapore instituted a similar framework by amending its Electronic Transactions Act in 2021. These legislative developments were based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (MLETR), which has gained increasing global influence since its adoption in 2017. This seminar discusses how the landscape of trade financing affects the use of technology, analyses recent legal developments relating to electronic trade documents, and identifies remaining challenges for trade digitalisation.

Biography: Dora Neo is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. She was the founding Director of the Faculty’s Centre for Banking & Finance Law, which she led for some ten years from 2013. Her areas of focus include the modernisation of trade finance law, global developments in secured transactions law, consumer protection in the finance industry and contract law. Her publications include Trade Finance: Technology, Innovation and Documentary Credits (co-edited with C Hare, Oxford University Press); The Law and Practice of Documentary Letters of Credit (co-authored with E P Ellinger, Hart Publishing);Secured Transactions Law in Asia: Principles, Perspectives and Reform (co-edited with L Gullifer, Hart Publishing) and Studies in the Contract Laws of Asia V: Ending and Changing Contracts (co-edited with M Chen-Wishart and S Vogenauer, Oxford University Press, forthcoming). In Michaelmas Term 2025, she is an academic visitor at the Cambridge Law Faculty under the sponsorship of the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law (3CL), and a Visiting Fellow at Wolfson College.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

The 2025-26 Mackenzie-Stuart Lecture was delivered by Professor Anand Menon, Director, UK in a Changing Europe, on the title 'Reflections on the Brexit Revolution' on 3 November 2025.

Anand Menon is Director of the UK in a Changing Europe and Professor of European Politics and Foreign Affairs at King’s College London. He has written widely on many aspects of EU politics and policy and on UK-EU relations. He is a frequent contributor to the media on matters relating to British relations with the EU.

Abstract: The outcome of the Brexit referendum was driven by many forces, including increasing frustration at an economic and political model that seemed to be failing far too many people. And the vote to Leave in fact provided a unique opportunity for this discontent to be addressed. The fact that it was not has merely contributed to the growing appeal of populism. And along the way, many of the things we took for granted about our country and the way it is governed have been challenged.

Lecture begins at 03:52

The slides are available at:

• PDF: https://resources.law.cam.ac.uk/cels/MSL_2025_26_slides.pdf
• Powerpoint: https://resources.law.cam.ac.uk/cels/MSL_2025_26_slides.pptx

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for European Legal Studies website at:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/mackenzie-stuart-lectures

Ayşe Zarakol is Professor of International Relations at the University of Cambridge (Emmanuel College). She is the author of After Defeat: How the East Learned to Live with the West (Cambridge UP, 2011) and Before the West: The Rise and Fall of Eastern World Orders (Cambridge UP, 2022), and the editor of Hierarchies in World Politics (Cambridge UP, 2017). Before the We has won six awards, including the SSHA and ISA annual best book prizes. In 2024, she was elected to fellowship in the British Academy and the Academia Europea. Also in 2024, she received an Honorary Doctorate from the University of Copenhagen. At the moment, Zarakol is overseeing an international research collaboration on Global Disorder funded by a British Academy Knowledge Frontiers Grant. She is also one of the two Associate Editors of International Organization. Her next book, Ozymandias, is a world history of strongmen, aimed at a general audience. This book is under contract with William Collins (UK) and Grove Atlantic (US). 

Chair: Prof Surabhi Ranganathan

This lecture was given on 31 October 2025 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series at the Lauterpacht Centre.

Biography: Dr Yin Harn Lee is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Bristol. Her research interests lie primarily in copyright law. A significant part of her research focuses on copyright and videogames, and she is also interested in historical aspects of copyright as well as the interface between intellectual property and personal property.

Abstract: The exclusive right to control the copying or reproduction of a work has been described by one leading copyright treatise as ‘the most fundamental, and historically the oldest, right of a copyright owner’. The first British copyright statute, the 1710 Statute of Anne, conferred on rightholders the exclusive right to print and reprint their books. Since then, the right has expanded far beyond its legislative origins, and now encompasses acts of copying in both digital and analogue form, those that are both temporary and permanent, and those that are merely incidental to the use of the work. Scholars have expressed concern about the now-expansive scope of the right, and there have been calls to restrict the right (e.g. by removing ‘non-expressive copying’ and copying that does not enable the use of the material in question ‘as a work’) or to replace it altogether with a broad right of ‘commercial exploitation’.

This paper will show that, while these proposals are laudable and inventive, they nevertheless encounter the same pitfalls as those faced by English courts in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when called upon to define the scope of what constitutes ‘copying’. It will argue that the root of the problem lies in the absence of stable, developed principles for defining the legitimate scope of the rightholder’s market, and that attempts at framing this as a question of statutory interpretation only obscure this fundamental fact.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

The Hatton Chair is the first endowed professorship in climate law in the United Kingdom. The aim of the Chair is to advance research and teaching with a view to strengthening legal responses to the ongoing climate crisis.

The lecture was followed by a panel on 'The Prospects of Global Climate Law'

Co-organised by the University of Cambridge and LUISS.

Abstract: In this seminar Dr Ghosh will address what, post-Lipton are the rules for REUL/AL; examples of UK Court decisions which should but do not apply REUL/AL and will provide a useful template for future litigation.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

This is the first episode of our new season of CULSCAST Conversations, where we bring the Cambridge law community closer together through insightful and engaging discussions.

In this episode, we’re introducing the 2024–2025 CULS Committee! Join our new host, Janice, as she speaks with members of the Main Committee, including the heads of Pro Bono, Law Ball, Socials, and Careers, as well as our President, Jiwon. Together, they share their experiences, what inspired them to join CULS, and their vision for the year ahead — from academic opportunities to exciting social events.

This episode offers a behind-the-scenes look at the people who make CULS what it is: a dynamic, collaborative, and welcoming community for Cambridge law students. Whether you’re a fresher, a returning member, or simply curious about life at the Cambridge University Law Society, this conversation is the perfect place to start.

The host for today’s episode is Janice, a second-year undergraduate reading Law at Cambridge, and one of CULS’s newest podcast hosts for 2024–2025.

📍The contents of this episode were recorded at the Cambridge Law Faculty in October 2025.

A huge thank you to everyone who contributed to this episode.

Special thanks to: Shakti Jacota, Jign Hao Liang, Sophie Farr, Rishik Vishwanathan, Chloe Levieux, Cheyanne Owee, Alldon Tan, and Jiwon Heo for appearing in this episode and sharing their insights, experiences, and enthusiasm for the year ahead.

Follow us on our socials to stay up to date with all things CULS:

📸 Instagram: [@cambridgelawsociety]

📘 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/camlawsoc/?locale=en_GB

To find out more about CULS or to become a member, visit our website 📝

Website

Linktree

This presentation, based on Professor Steinberg’s June 2025 Oxford University Press book Corporate Director and Officer Liability — “Discretionaries” Not Fiduciaries, posits that corporate directors and officers are not fiduciaries. In fact, the liability standards that normally apply are too lenient to be identified as fiduciary. This mischaracterization is detrimental to the rule of law, contravenes reasonable investor expectations, and impairs the integrity of the financial markets. Therefore, Professor Steinberg calls for the removal of fiduciary status replaced with the adoption of a new and neutral term that conveys an accurate description: corporate directors and officers are “discretionaries”. This term accurately portrays the status of corporate directors and officers who held to varying standards of liability depending on the applicable facts and circumstances. From this perspective, Professor Steinberg’s presentation will address a broad range of important issues, including the duty of care, the business judgment rule, exculpation statutes, the duty of good faith, and the duty of loyalty. To date, this book has received excellent reviews and is generating thoughtful discussion on the propriety of continuing to view corporate directors and officers as fiduciaries.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Biography: Professor Andrew Christie was the foundation appointment to the Chair of Intellectual Property at the University of Melbourne in 2002.He holds BSc and LLB (Hons) degrees from the University of Melbourne, a LLM from the University of London, and a PhD from the University of Cambridge (Emmanuel College). Admitted to legal practice in Australia and the United Kingdom, he has worked in the intellectual property departments of law firms in Melbourne and London. He is a former Fulbright Senior Scholar, and has held research and teaching appointments at the University of Cambridge, Duke University, the National University of Singapore, and the University of Toronto.

Awarded 12 Australian Research Council grants and instrumental in winning other research funding in excess of $11 million, he has authored more than 120 publications, and delivered by invitation more than 180 public addresses in 20 countries, across all areas of intellectual property law. He has served on all of the Australian government’s advisory committees on intellectual property – the Copyright Law Review Committee, the Advisory Council on Intellectual Property, and the Plant Breeder’s Rights Advisory Committee – and has been an expert advisor to World Intellectual Property Organization on a number of occasions. He currently chairs the Trans-Tasman IP Attorneys Board, the regulator of the Australian and New Zealand patent attorney profession.

Abstract: With more than 18 million patents for inventions in force across 140 jurisdictions, patents are a significant area of the law. However, the traditional justifications for having a patent system are incomplete, and do not take full account of developments in economic thinking that recognise the primary purpose of economics is to enhance human wellbeing. The primary purpose of patents should be likewise. There is sparse academic and policy literature on the relevance of wellbeing economics to patent policy, and what exists leaves unanswered many questions about how the patent system can be used to achieve this policy objective. This presentation answers those questions, by tracing the evolution of wellbeing economics, identifying the doctrinal levers available to implement patent policy, and providing practical examples of the application of those levers to ensure the patent system incentivises innovations that advance wellbeing.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Jan Klabbers was educated in international law and political science at the University of Amsterdam, where he also defended his doctoral thesis. In 1996 he was appointed professor of international law at the University of Helsinki, a position he recently left to take up the Whewell Chair in Cambridge. His research focuses mostly on the law of treaties and the law of international organizations – today’s talk taps into his current, ERC-sponsored PRIVIGO project.

Chair: Prof Surabhi Ranganathan, Centre Deputy Director

This lecture was given on 10 October 2025 and part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series at the Lauterpacht Centre.

CWIL is an exciting social network of alumnae at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, which features a diverse range of women from all sectors.

In this session, you’ll hear personal reflections on how each panellist carved out a path in human rights practice, and gain insights into:

• The current intersection of human rights, legislation and common law in the UK’s Constitutional framework
• New frontiers for Human Rights litigation including private law and international human rights in a post Brexit UK
• Human Rights and Geopolitics

For more information and to sign up to the CWIL mailing list to receive information about future news and events, see https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/alumni-developmentalumni-events/cambridge-women-law-cwil

Shirley Williams, Baroness Williams of Crosby, was one of the 'Gang of Four' moderate Labour politicians who in 1981 founded the Social Democratic Party (SDP), which merged with the Liberal Party in 1988 to form the Liberal Democrats.

Baroness Williams was first elected as an MP in the 1964 General Election to represent the Labour Party in the constituency of Hitchin, Hertfordshire. She rapidly rose to a junior ministerial position and subsequently served as Shadow Home Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection, Secretary of State for Education, and Paymaster General until she lost her seat in the general election of 1979.

In 1981 she resigned from the Labour Party to form the SDP, along with Roy Jenkins, David Owen and Bill Rodgers. Later that year she won the by-election for Crosby in Merseyside to become the first elected SDP MP. After losing her seat in 1983 she became a familiar face as a broadcaster on In conversation with Shirley Williams and has appeared on the BBC's Question Time more than any other panellist.

n 1988, Williams moved to the USA as Professor of Elective Politics at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government until 2001. She helped draft constitutions in Russia, Ukraine and South Africa, served as a UN Special Representative to the former Yugoslavia, and has been President of Chatham House, the Royal Institute for International Affairs. With Amartya Sen, she is a director of the US-based Nuclear Threat Initiative, which seeks to reduce the risk of use of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons; and in 2007 was appointed by the Prime Minister as an independent advisor on nuclear proliferation.

The Alcuin lectures are named after the 8th century scholar Alcuin of York, who was a key advisor to the Emperor Charlemagne and a central figure in the Carolingian Renaissance. The lectures were established in 1999 with a benefaction from Lord Brittan, himself a former European Commissioner. The theme for the lecture must be some aspect of the relationship between Britain and the European Institutions. Previous speakers have included Lord Patten, Lord Hannay and Dr Carl Bildt.

On 9 July Part 1 of the report was published, dealing with reform measures. Here, Sir Leveson proposed a number of changes to reduce the pressure on the criminal justice system. What attracted the most media attention was the proposal to reduce access to trial by jury. However, there were other very interesting proposals which received less coverage and scrutiny.

In this short video Dr Jonathan Rogers explores some of the other changes proposed, and considers their likely effects.

Jonathan Rogers is Associate Professor in Criminal Justice at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. He co-founded the Criminal Law Reform Now Network in 2017.

For more information about Dr Rogers, you can also refer to his staff profile.

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

We will come together to celebrate the life and scholarship of our colleague and friend, Professor Karen Knop (1960-2022). Karen, until her untimely passing, was the Cecil A Wright Chair at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law. A long-time friend of the Lauterpacht Centre, Karen was to have delivered the Centre’s 2025 Hersch Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures.

The 2025 Lectures will take place on 13 and 14 March, over four special sessions, conversing with Karen’s extraordinary body of work across the history and theory of international law, gender and feminism studies, and private and foreign relations law. Four former HLM Lecturers will deliver these lectures in conversation with three discussants, all outstanding scholars mentored by Karen.

Session IV Discussion and Q&A led by Professor Susan Marks

Chair: Professor Antony Anghie

Professor Marks will lead the discussion of the three talks, teasing out cross-cutting themes and the enduring influence of Karen Knop’s scholarship across different fields of international law scholarship.

Susan Marks is Professor of International Law at the LSE.

We will come together to celebrate the life and scholarship of our colleague and friend, Professor Karen Knop (1960-2022). Karen, until her untimely passing, was the Cecil A Wright Chair at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law. A long-time friend of the Lauterpacht Centre, Karen was to have delivered the Centre’s 2025 Hersch Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures.

Session III Private and Foreign Relations Law

Professor Anne Peters in conversation with Dr Roxana Banu

Chair: Professor Campbell McLachlan

Professor Peters’s talk, 'Populism, Foreign Relations Law, and global order and justice', will discuss populist foreign relations law, which was Karen Knop’s last project, at the university of Helsinki and as a Max Planck fellow. This talk will make the point that ongoing transformations of the concept of law itself, of legal procedures, and of legal substance cut across the ‘levels’ of governance. And neither identitarian rhetoric, nor trade wars, nor border-fences will bring back an inter-state, Westphalian (or ‘Eastfalian’) order. We are living in conditions of global law (and transnational) law. Populist heads of state both deploy and defy this law (concluding populist treaties or deals such as the German-Turkish refugee agreements; denouncing treaties such as ICSID or the Paris Agreement; using their war powers to escape domestic critique; raising tariffs to please their voter-base, and so on). At the same time, domestic, local and transnational actors (ranging from cities to courts to Indigenous peoples, or philanthro-capitalists) activate all kinds of law to resist populism. Such global lawfare destabilises world order but also has a transformative potential. New legal forms (especially informal agreements), new legal processes (such as public interest litigation before the ICJ) and new legal principles (such as One Health; Rectification/reparation; and the exposure of double standards) are responding to the big challenges for global order and justice: the cultural, the social, and the ecological challenge.

Dr Banu’s talk, 'Foreign Affairs, Self-Determination and Private International Law', begins with the point that foreign affairs questions are often thought to lie at the very edge of private international law, perhaps in the leftover corners of the historical alignment between private and public international law. Similarly, in part on the assumption that private international law settles conflicts of laws between already established states, there wouldn’t appear to be any intuitive connection between nationalist or self-determination movements and the field of private international law.

This talk will show that these assumptions are mistaken. By engaging with the historical development of the field from the mid-nineteenth century onwards, the talk will show that private international law has been deeply enmeshed in major geopolitical events generally, and in nationalist and self-determination movements, in particular. This enmeshment is neither accidental, nor exclusively modern. It is the inevitable result of some of private international law’s main analytical and conceptual building blocks.

Anne Peters is Director at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law Heidelberg (Germany), and Professor at the universities of Heidelberg, Freie Universität Berlin and Basel (Switzerland).

Roxana Banu is Associate Professor and Tutorial Fellow at the Faculty of Law and Lady Margaret Hall, University of Oxford.

We will come together to celebrate the life and scholarship of our colleague and friend, Professor Karen Knop (1960-2022). Karen, until her untimely passing, was the Cecil A Wright Chair at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law. A long-time friend of the Lauterpacht Centre, Karen was to have delivered the Centre’s 2025 Hersch Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures.

Session II Gender and Feminism

Professor Christine Chinkin in conversation with Dr Mai Taha

Chair: Professor Sandesh Sivakumaran

Professor Chinkin’s talk, 'Self-determination for women through three encounters' will explore three encounters with Karen's Knop's work that illustrate how self-determination remains illusory in many instances for women and their responses that challenge the structures of international law: discriminatory laws with respect to the nationality of married women; the Tokyo Women's Tribunal; and the Greenham Common women's peace camp.

Dr Taha’s talk, ‘Ways of Seeing: On the Gendering Work of Law and Violence’ will provide comments and reflections in engagement with Professor Chinkin’s talk, and Professor Knop’s writings.

Christine Chinkin, FBA, CMG is Emerita Professor of International Law at the LSE, Visiting Professorial Research Fellow at the LSE Centre for Women, Peace and Security and Global Law Professor at the University of Michigan.

Mai Taha is Assistant Professor of Human Rights in the Department of Sociology at the LSE.

We will come together to celebrate the life and scholarship of our colleague and friend, Professor Karen Knop (1960-2022). Karen, until her untimely passing, was the Cecil A Wright Chair at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law. A long-time friend of the Lauterpacht Centre, Karen was to have delivered the Centre’s 2025 Hersch Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures.

Session I - History and Theory

Professor Martti Koskenniemi in conversation with Dr Megan Donaldson

Chair: Professor Surabhi Ranganathan

Professor Koskenniemi’ s talk, 'Narrating International Society: Management of Pluralism according to Marcel Gauchet & Karen Knop’, will first address the emergence of the theme of a “law of an international society” in the 19th century, its use in the 20th century to support a managerial view of international institutions. It will then focus on the challenges that cultural and ideological pluralism poses to received ideas about the role of law in the government of domestic and international society.

Dr Donaldson’s talk, ‘Gaze, Agency and International Society’, reads Karen Knop’s early work on self-determination as a repertoire of techniques for thinking collectivities and affiliations against and across states. The multiple and mobile perspectives she brought to bear, and the agency she glimpsed in disparate individuals and communities, pervaded much of her later work too, and remains open to, even generative of, renewed understandings of international society.

Martti Koskenniemi is Professor Emeritus of International law at the University of Helsinki.

Megan Donaldson is Associate Professor of International Law at University College London.

For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/activities-archive

The Cambridge Pro Bono Project is a research centre that draws on the subject-matter expertise of graduate researchers and Faculty experts to produce reports on a wide range of public interest matters. Every year, we invite distinguished speakers to address our researchers, staff, and students at the University of Cambridge.

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/ Twitter (https://twitter.com/Cam_ProBono) or Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/CamProBono).

Lady Rose was called to the Bar by Gray's Inn in 1984. She practised as a barrister for ten years before joining the Government Legal Service. She served in HM Treasury, the Ministry of Defence and the Office of Counsel to the Speaker of the House of Commons. In 2006 she was appointed to her first judicial role as a fee-paid Chairman of the Competition Appeal Tribunal. She was appointed to further tribunal posts and became a Recorder in the Crown Court, Criminal jurisdiction in 2010. In May 2013 Dame Vivien was sworn in as a High Court Judge in the Chancery Division where she sat for over five years. She was appointed to the Court of Appeal in January 2019 and to the Supreme Court in April 2021.

In her role as a Justice of the Supreme Court, Lady Rose has been involved in a number of important cases across the range of the Court’s work from public law challenges concerning human rights and Scottish devolution issues, to tax cases and common law contract and tort cases.

Our introductory speakers in this episode are Joyce Mau (CULS President 2024-2025) and Kai Zhen Tek (CULS Speakers Secretary 2024-2025), who also organised the event.

The following cases are mentioned in this talk:

• Hassam and Another v Rabot and Another [2024] UKSC 11
• Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v Central Arbitration Committee and Another [2023] UKSC 43
• R (on the application of O v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKSC 3
• In the matter of an application by Rosaleen Dalton for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) [2023] UKSC 36
• McCulloch v Forth Valley Health Board [2023] UKSC 26
• R (on the application of Elan-Cane) (Art 8 male/female passports) [2021] UKSC 56
• Reference by the Lord Advocate of devolution issues under paragraph 34 of Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998 (the “indyref2” case) [2022] UKSC 31
• Reference by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland -Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Northern Ireland) Bill [2022] UKSC 32

This episode was edited by Jiwon Heo (CULS Publicity Secretary 2024-2025).

Tanja Aalberts is Professor of Law and Politics at the department of Transnational Legal Studies, VU Amsterdam. She is the author of 'Constructing Sovereignty between Politics and Law' (Routledge, 2012), co-author of 'The Changing Practices of International Law' (CUP, 2018) and co-edited 'The Power of Legality. Practices of International Law and their Politics' (CUP, 2016). Her work on the interplay between politics and law within global governance, misrecognition, colonial treaties and interdisciplinarity has been published in various journals and handbooks in International Law and International Relations. She was a founding board member of the European International Studies Association, and editor of the Leiden Journal of International Law. She currently is series editor for Voices in IR with Oxford University Press and member of the Advisory Council International Affairs for the Dutch government. Her current research focuses on transnational legal encounters and the aesthetics of international law. She is also doing archival research and writing a book on the Peace Palace as the first building of the international community.

https://www.lcil.cam.ac.uk/press/events/2025/05/friday-lecture-rubber-boats-transnational-legal-encounters-mediterranean-prof-tanja-aalberts-vu

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

1. Ms Paulina Rundel, PhD Candidate, University of Vienna: The UN Charter Navigating the Moon: The Moon Agreement versus the Artemis Accords. (02:10)

2. Dr Abbie-Rose Hampton, Research Associate; Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellow, King’s College London: Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing and the Pandemic Treaty: Maintaining the Status Quo? (20:55)

3. Dr Milena Sterio, Charles R. Emrick Jr. – Calfee Halter & Griswold Professor of Law, Cleveland State University College of Law: Artificial Intelligence and Individual Criminal Responsibility: A Paradox or a Possibility? (34:48)

4. Ms Martina Elia Vitoloni, DCL Candidate, McGill University: Orbiting Beyond Control: International Law and the Rise of Private Power in Outer Space. (50:40)

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

1. Ms Liuva Ramos Masó, Early Career Researcher (Ghent Alumni), Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): Hide and seek with private military companies (pmcs) the urgent need for an international regulatory framework. (01:48)

2. Dr Kostia Gorobets, Assistant Professor of International Law, University of Groningen: The Law of Multipolarity: How Russia Creates Its Alternative Legality. (17:02)

3. Dr Alberto Rinaldi, Postdoctoral Researcher, Lund University: Cognitive Warfare in the Biotechnological Age: Threats and Challenges to International Law. (29:18)

4. Dr Mohamad Janaby, Lecturer, University of Glasgow: Counter-Terrorism and Government Recognition: The Intersection of International Law in Post-Conflict Transitions. (44:21)

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

1. Dr Ernst-Ulrich Petersman, Professor Emeritus, European University Insitutite: Constitutional Pluralism as Political Driver for Multipolar Re-ordering of International Legal Systems. (04:35)

2. Dr Konstantina Georgaki, Assistant Professor in International and European Economic Law, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki: The EU's defence to economic warfare: A long-awaited U-turn? (21:35)

3. Dr Abdulkadir Nacar, Researcher, Istanbul Univeristy: Decentralized Finance as a Tool for Objective Global Sanctions: Integrating Capital Influence within the UN System. (40:53)

4. Ms Khrystyna Kostiushko, Independent Counsel: Consequences of Incorporation/Annexation of Territory for the Spatial Scope of Application of Investment Treaties. (55:00)

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

1. Dr Lora Izvorova, LSE Fellow, London School of Economics and Political Sciences: Deconstructing Dignity: Two Archetypes in European Human Rights Law. (01:10)

2. Dr Chloë McRae Gilgan, Senior Lecturer, University of Lincoln: Refuge in Peril: The Responsibility to Protect Populations Fleeing Mass Atrocities. (19:18)

3. Dr Bethan Hall, Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore: The Human Rights Obligations of Corporate Sovereigns. (38:57)

4. Dr Gabriela García Escobar, Professor of Public International Law, Universidad Panamericana: Two Models of Universality: What are the Prospects for Human Rights in a Fragmented World? (55:45)

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

1. Ms Danielle Flanagan, Associate, Hogan Lovells LLP: Rethinking Universal Jurisdiction: A Shift Towards Greater Universality? (01:54)

2. Dr Ata Hindi, Murphy Institute Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Tulane University School of Law: Here Comes Your Ghost Again: Individual Immunities for International Crimes. (16:51)

3. Dr Giovanni Chiarini, Assistant Professor of Law, Alfaisal University: Negotiated Justice Transformation: From Post-WWII Military Tribunals' Ethical Denial to Modern International Courts' Procedural Approaches.(34:59)

Please note there are some audio glitches on this recording. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience.

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

1. Ms Crisela Bernardino, Researcher in Corporate Climate Litigation, British Insitutue of International and Comparative Law (BIICL): In the Interests of Climate Justice: International Law and Decolonial Perspectives on the Philippine Climate Case Against the ‘Carbon Majors’. (02:08)

2. Mr Selman Aksünger, PhD Candidate, Maastricht University: Permanent Sovereignty Over Maritime Zones: A Response to Sea Level Rise Induced Coastal Instability. (19:39)

3. Ms Jessica Crow, PhD Candidate, University of Cambridge: Emissions Trading: An Emerging Tension at the Nexus of Investment Protection and Climate Governance. (34:48)

4. Ms Katharina Neumann, DPhil Candidate, University of Oxford: The Forgotten Sector: The UN Climate Change Regime and Agricultural Emissions. (52:02)

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

1. Dr Jolyon Ford SFHEA, Professor, Australian National University; and Dr Imogen Saunders, Associate Professor, Australian National University: International Law as Geology: Crawford's core/periphery metaphor and challenges to the contemporary international legal order. (02:18)

2. Ms Jessie Phyffer, LLD Candidate, University of Pretoria; Research Associate University of Johannesburg: The “International Community”: A Useful Rhetorical Technique to Induce a Common Interest-Based International Legal Order. (17:40)

3. Dr Sarah McCosker, Founding Partner, Lexbridge Lawyers; and Dr Esmé Shirlow, Associate Professor, Australian National University: The Rise of Non- Treaty Instruments: Challenges and Implications for the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law. (27:50)

4. Mr Taran Molloy, Barrister (New Zealand): De-pluralising International Legal Personality: International Organisations and the 20th Century Shift to Statehood. (45:42)

5. Mr Sebastian von Massow, PhD Candidate, European University Institute: Litigating Colonial Self-Determination. (59:22)

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

• Introduction (00:00)
• Keynote 4 (01:18)

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

• Introduction (00:00)
• Keynote 2 (02:49)

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

This is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

This book examines the challenges for press freedom in the nascent digital news ecosystem. Drawing upon decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as from German, UK and US case law, this comparative work explores the regulation of the press in the digital era and the impact of the proliferating media laws, policies, and jurisprudence on press freedom.

Professor Jacob Rowbottom (University of Oxford) chaired the discussion between Dr Irini Katsirea (University of Sheffield), Dr Peter Coe, (University of Birmingham), Emeritus Professor Thomas Gibbons (University of Manchester), and Emeritus Professor Bernd Holznagel (University of Münster).

This is Episode 3 of our ‘CULSCAST Conversations’ series, which aims to bring the Cambridge law community closer together through conversation. This episode covers studying, revision, and exam tips from top-performing Cambridge law students. Give our socials a follow to get regular updates on the wonderful CULS events happening throughout term!

• Instagram: ⁠⁠@Cambridgelawsociety⁠⁠
• Facebook: ⁠⁠Cambridge University Law Society ⁠⁠

To find out more about CULS or become a CULS member, visit our ⁠⁠website ⁠⁠📝.

About this episode:

• For Cambridge law students, Easter term is exam season. We know that this can be a tough period for many, especially those doing their Tripos exams for the first time. Therefore, we have prepared an episode on study, revision, and exam tips to guide current and future students, in collaboration with our 2024-2025 Per Inc team.
• Per Inc is CULS’s termly magazine publishing both student articles and first-class law essays and PQs. You can read the latest issues here. Our panellists for this episode included the Per Incuriam Editor-in-Chief 2024-2025 and contributors from our Michaelmas 2024 edition.
• The host for today's episode is Jiwon Heo, a second-year student reading law at Cambridge, and one of CULS’s Publicity Officers 2024-2025.
• The contents of this episode were recorded at the Cambridge Law Faculty on 28th February 2025.

The following is a list of our guests on this episode:

·      Ewan O’Mahony, a final-year undergraduate reading law at Queen’s College and Per Incuriam Editor-in-Chief 2024-2025;

·      Ben Mays, a final-year undergraduate reading law at Trinity College;

·      Qinglan Du, a final-year undergraduate reading law at Christ’s College; and

·      Brendan Mark, a second-year undergraduate reading law at Magdalene College.

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this episode. Special thanks to Daniel Bates, Legal Research Training and Communications Specialist at the Cambridge Law Faculty, for his technical support and assistance in audio editing and production. Also special thanks to Per Incuriam deputy editor, Chloe Levieux, and Jessica Wong, CULS’s Publicity Freshers’ Representative for 2024-2025, who helped us analyse what questions our members had around the topics in this episode.

Session 4: Concluding Thoughts – AI Transforming IP

On Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'

For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.

While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 3: AI Transforming the Scope of Protection and Enforcement

On Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'

For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.

While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 3: AI Transforming the Scope of Protection and Enforcement

On Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'

For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.

While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 3: AI Transforming the Scope of Protection and Enforcement

On Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'

For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.

While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 3: AI Transforming the Scope of Protection and Enforcement

On Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'

For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.

While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 2: AI Transforming IP Application / Registration Processes and Eligibility Tests

On Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'

For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.

While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Session 2: AI Transforming IP Application / Registration Processes and Eligibility Tests

On Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'

For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.

While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.

For more information see:

https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

The controversies here are not about the dangers of markets themselves, but rather the dangers of buying/selling certain goods or services. Advocates of market restrictions seek to define the ethical boundaries of the marketplace – to identify the specific goods and services that are inappropriate for market trading, and to explain why these restrictions should exist even for apparently willing buyers and sellers.

Although all cultures have deemed some transactions too sacred for the marketplace, the targets of these restrictions have varied widely, even within a given time period. For example, prostitution is currently legal in much of the world but illegal in most of the United States. Meanwhile, commercial surrogacy and paid egg donation are legal in much of the United States but illegal in many other parts of the world.

This talk delves into these and other restricted trades. It identifies how they are regulated by legal regimes as well as social norms, evaluates the consequences of different approaches, and explores potential paths forward.

About the Speaker: Professor Kimberly D. Krawiec holds the Charles O. Gregory Professorship of Law at the University of Virginia. Her current research analyses “taboo trades” — exchanges that are contested by society and, in some cases, forbidden altogether. She has written on commercial surrogacy, egg and sperm markets, and sex work. At the moment, much of her work is on incentives for organ donation. Another area of her research centres on the regulation of financial markets and business organizations. Prof. Krawiec has extensively examined the administrative process surrounding the Volcker Rule, a complex and highly contested provision of the Dodd-Frank Act. She has also researched corporate boards of directors. Through an ethnographic method, this work analyses directors’ views on the workings of the corporate boardroom and board relations with management, with a special emphasis on directors’ views on race and gender diversity in the boardroom.

With a wealth of experience in commodity and derivatives law, she has also been a commentator for the Central European and Eurasian Law Initiative (CEELI) of the American Bar Association and has taught at top institutions including Duke, North Carolina, Harvard, and Northwestern, where she won the Robert Childres Award for Teaching Excellence.

The lecture begins at 03:44

Baron Cornelius Ver Heyden de Lancey (1889-1984) was a wealthy and public-spirited Dutchman who at different times in his life was a dentist, doctor, surgeon, barrister and art historian. In 1970 he created the De Lancey and De La Hanty Foundation, to promote studies in medico-legal topics. The Foundation generously gave Cambridge the Ver Heyden de Lancey Fund, which since 1996 has funded occasional public lectures on medico-legal issues of current interest.

For more information about the Baron Ver Heyden de Lancey Lecture series, please see http://www.lml.law.cam.ac.uk/events/vhdl-events

Chair: Professor Antony Anghie (Goodhart Professor, National University of Singapore and the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law)

Abstract: In this presentation I will provide an account of the statehood of Palestine. After outlining the basic principles relating to statehood in international law, I will argue that recognition plays an important role in such assessments. My talk will focus on four key moments extending from the time of the League of Nations to the United Nations period. In presenting this account, I will address my own experience as a legal adviser to the State of Palestine in the negotiations on the adoption of General Assembly Resolution 67/19 in 2012 when the State of Palestine was conferred observer state status at the UN.

Biography: Victor Kattan is Assistant Professor of Public International Law at the School of Law at the University of Nottingham. His publications include The Palestine Question in International Law (British Institute of International and Comparative Law, 2008). From Coexistence to Conquest: International Law and the Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict 1891-1949 (Pluto Press, 2009). The Breakup of India and Palestine: The Causes and Legacies of Partition (Manchester University Press, 2023, with Amit Ranjan), and Making Endless War: The Vietnam and Arab-Israeli Conflicts in the History of International Law (Michigan University Press, 2023, with Brian Cuddy).

• Professor Anghie: 01:22
• Professor Kattan: 12:23

For more information about CULWOB see:

https://www.cambridgesu.co.uk/organisation/culwob/

Hussein Haeri KC is a Partner at Withers in London and Head of the firm's Public International Law Group. He is a King's Counsel and was the only Solicitor Advocate to take Silk in 2024. Hussein has extensive experience as counsel and advocate on international dispute resolution matters for almost 20 years in London, Paris and New York, including before the ICJ, ITLOS, under ICSID and UNCITRAL arbitration rules and in national courts. He has been recognised for many years by the major legal directories including Chambers & Partners, which refers to him as an "outstanding lawyer", and Legal 500 which states that "he combines huge intellectual powers with great client handling".

He is a Partner Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, a Senior Fellow at SOAS in London and has lectured at various other universities including the University of Oxford, Sciences Po in Paris and Roma Tre University in Rome.

The 2025 Mackenzie-Stuart Lecture was delivered by The Rt. Hon. Nick Thomas–Symonds MP, Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Minister for the Constitution and European Union Relations) under the title 'The UK's Relationship with the European Union' on 13 March 2025.

Nick Thomas–Symonds was elected as the MP for Torfaen in May 2015, and was appointed Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Minister for the Constitution and European Union Relations) at the Cabinet Office on 8 July 2024.

Lecture begins at 02:58

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for European Legal Studies website at:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/mackenzie-stuart-lectures

Abstract: The debate about the future of the European Union has long left academic circles, arrived in the midst of society and been awarded political attention. Meanwhile, there has been an increase of Euroscepticism accompanied by more nationalist political developments echoed in the swings to the right all across the EU. These developments may, arguably at least in parts, be explained by social resentments of the peoples of Europe. While acknowledging that law constructs and contributes to a social reality of its own it is thus, arguably also about the lack of a genuine socio-economic equilibrium within the law and political system of the EU. This imbalance is not only found within the EU legal constitutional framework, but also within the case-law of the European Court of Justice. However, possible solutions to solve this socio-economic imbalance are limited: It is either (i) Treaty reform or, alternatively, (ii) a change in the approach of the Court in its jurisprudence. While these alternatives are both valid and, to some extent, mutually exclusive, they unveil and epitomise different visions as regards the future of the European Union. However, while acknowledging the differences in the approach, they are arguably different means to serve the very same end: Warrant the European Union’s future success.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Professors Munro and Horvath both actively contributed to Operation Soteria, the joint project between the police and CPS to rethink how allegations of sexual violence should be investigated and prosecuted. In this public lecture they will reflect together on the data they collected and the findings concerning reasons for underperformance, myths and stereotypes affecting charging decisions and the treatment of complainants. They will conclude by reflecting on the prospects for sustainable improvement post-Soteria. There will be opportunities for the audience to ask questions at the end.

For more information see: https://www.cccj.law.cam.ac.uk/past-events-0

Michael Townley Featherstone Briggs, Lord Briggs of Westbourne became a Justice of the Supreme Court in October 2017.

Lord Briggs grew up around Portsmouth and Plymouth, following his naval officer father between ships, before spending his later childhood in West Sussex. He attended Charterhouse and Magdalen College, Oxford. A keen sailor and the first lawyer in his family, he practised in commercial and chancery work before being appointed to the High Court in 2006. He was the judge in charge of the extensive Lehman insolvency litigation from 2009 to 2013.

Lord Briggs was appointed as a Lord Justice of Appeal in 2013. He was the judge in charge of the Chancery Modernisation Review in 2013, and led the Civil Courts Structure Review in 2015 to 2016. In January 2016 he was appointed Deputy Head of Civil Justice.

Timings:

• Professor Graham Virgo - Introduction: 00:00
• The Rt. Hon. Lord Briggs of Westbourne: 02:07

The XXIV Old Buildings Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest of the Cambridge Private Law Centre, and the event is sponsored by XXIV Old Buildings.

More information about this lecture is available from the Private Law Centre website:

https://www.privatelaw.law.cam.ac.uk/events

Sharath Srinivasan is David and Elaine Potter Professor of International Politics at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of King's College, Cambridge. He is also Founding Director, and currently Co-Director, of the University of Cambridge's Centre of Governance and Human Rights (CGHR). Professor Srinivasan is a Fellow and Trustee of the Rift Valley Institute and a Trustee and Vice-President of the British Institute in Eastern Africa.

Professor Srinivasan’s work focuses on contentious politics in Africa in global perspective, from explaining failed peace interventions in civil wars to rethinking democratic politics in a digital age. He is the author of When Peace Kills Politics: International Intervention and Unending Wars in the Sudans (Hurst/Oxford University Press, 2021) and co-editor of Making and Breaking Peace in Sudan and South Sudan: The Comprehensive Peace Agreement and Beyond (British Academy/Oxford University Press, 2020).

Chair: Dr Juliana Santos de Carvalho, Centre Fellow

Richard Barnes is Professor of International Law at the University of Lincoln and Adjunct Professor of Law at the Norwegian Centre for the Law of the Sea, the University of Tromsø. His current research focuses on the human right to property, ocean commons, and the BBNJ Agreement. He is widely published in the fields of international law and law of the sea. Property Rights and Natural Resources (2009), won the SLS Birks Book Prize for Outstanding Legal Scholarship. He has edited several collections of essays including Research Handbook on Plastics Regulation (2024), Frontiers in International Environmental Law. Oceans and Climate (2021), Research Handbook on Climate Change, Oceans and Coasts (2020), and The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Living Instrument (2016). Professor Barnes a member of the ILA Committee on the Protection of People at Sea. He has acted as a consultant for the WWF, Oceana, ClientEarth, the European Parliament, the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. He has also provided advice to foreign ministries. He has appeared numerous times before Parliamentary select committees on matters related to law of the sea, fisheries and Brexit. He is on the Editorial Board of International and Comparative Law Quarterly, the International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, the New Zealand Yearbook of International Law, the German Yearbook of International Law, and the Portuguese Yearbook of the Law of the Sea. 

He also shares why he would not recommend swimming in the River Cam, about his favourite Roman jurist(s?), and a favourite bench in Cambridge.

Feminist activists, country representatives, and other civil society actors have debated how to define “gender” in international criminal law (ICL) for at least three decades. In the Rome Conference that established the International Criminal Court (ICC) and its Statute in 1998, defining “gender” was a hotly debated topic of negotiation. More recently, this debate has resurfaced in the steps leading to the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles for a Crimes Against Humanity Treaty, and continues to be discussed in the deliberations at the Sixth Committee on the Draft Articles. The CAH Convention is now expected to be negotiated between 2026-2029, and, more than a mere point of contention, the concept of ‘gender’ in its text can be crucial for prosecuting sexual and gender-based international crimes and thus fundamental to gender justice efforts worldwide. With this in mind, this roundtable gathers scholars and activists studying and working (often simultaneously) on the definition of gender in international criminal law, in an effort to learn from their specific positionalities, perceptions, and experiences about the challenges, strategies, and possibilities for (non-)defining the term.

https://www.lcil.cam.ac.uk/press/events/2025/02/panel-queering-gender-crimes-against-humanity-draft-possibilities-alliances-and-strategies

This lecture, based on Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima’s forthcoming book Governing Sovereign Debt Crises: The Case for International Sovereign Insolvency Law (Hart Publishing), makes the case for creating such a mechanism under international law. The book challenges prevailing narratives that attribute sovereign debt crises solely to debtor states’ mismanagement or misfortunes, instead arguing that sovereign insolvency is a systemic feature of the international monetary system. Current solutions—voluntary, ad hoc, and fragmented—fail to equitably allocate losses across an increasingly diversified sovereign creditor base, leaving many creditors worse off. At the same time, debtor states and their populations remain vulnerable to macroeconomic crises and enduring austerity, which often lead to long-term economic stagnation.

The book adopts a legal political economy approach to illustrate how power asymmetries among stakeholders and the absence of enforceable rules perpetuate inefficiencies and inequities in resolving sovereign debt crises. Drawing on the legal theory of finance, insolvency law, and common resource governance theory, it illustrates how these governance failures result in a dual tragedy: a tragedy of the commons and a tragedy of the anticommons. The lecture will also examine the growing complexity of sovereign debt markets, including the diversification of creditor types, the erosion of ‘gentlemen’s agreements,’ and the limitations of initiatives like the Paris Club and the G20’s Common Framework for debt treatments. It concludes by arguing that only international sovereign insolvency rules can resolve the delays, inefficiencies, and inequities that plague sovereign debt restructuring, while exploring avenues for implementing such a proceeding and discussing the role of domestic law in a well-functioning international sovereign debt architecture.

Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Leeds. Her research focuses on the intersection of law, finance, and sovereign debt within the broader context of global economic governance. Her research portfolio covers the legal governance of sovereign debt crises, the law and policy of international financial institutions, and the macroeconomic impact of financial law and regulation.

Dr Patrício advises public entities, NGOs, and leading law firms on various aspects of financial and monetary law, including sovereign debt restructuring, financial regulation, and the governance of international financial institutions. Her work has been recognised with prestigious awards, including the 2022 Society of International Economic Law-Hart Prize and the 2022 John H. Jackson Prize, conferred by the Journal of International Economic Law. She also serves as a peer reviewer for top law and social sciences journals globally.

The lecture begins at 05:18

Abstract: Our understanding of the operation of law beyond the nation State has been deeply shaped by two great disciplines: public and private international law. Yet surprisingly little systematic attention has been devoted to the relationship between the two. In his inaugural lecture as Professor of International Dispute Resolution in the University of Cambridge, McLachlan argues that the neglect of this interface is highly consequential for our understanding of law’s capacity to control the State and the corporation, which are, respectively, the principal holders of public/political and private/economic power in the world.

Campbell McLachlan is elected as Professor of Law (1973) in the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of Trinity Hall. He took up his chair in July 2024, specialising in International Dispute Resolution. A New Zealander, his career has spanned scholarship and practice in private and public international law. His principal works include: Foreign Relations Law (CUP 2014), International Investment Arbitration: Substantive Principles (2nd ed, OUP 2017) and The Principle of Systemic Integration in International Law (2024). He is a Specialist Editor of Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws. He gave the General Course at The Hague Academy of International Law in January 2024. He is a member of the Institut de Droit International and of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

Photographs of the event are available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/cambridgelawfaculty/albums/72177720323668326

Abstract: The EU ‘digital empire’ seeks to align technological development to its rights and values by adopting and promoting a rights-driven model of technological regulation. Bradford’s influential characterisation of EU digital strategy is credible when one maps the array of legal ‘Acts’ applicable to data, digital markets, digital services and AI adopted by the EU in recent years, all of which are without prejudice to the EU data protection law. Yet, when one delves deeper, the EU’s commitment to rights-based regulation of the digital sphere is not iron-clad. Rather, as we demonstrate through an empirical analysis of the European Commission’s adequacy decisions over a quarter of a century (1999-2024), there are clear divergences amongst EU institutions about the balance to be struck between fundamental rights and economic interests. Such divergence suggest the EU might more accurately be characterised as an amalgamation of fiefdoms rather than an empire. This inter-institutional dynamic is relevant to the legitimacy of EU actions in the digital sphere and may foreshadow the future direction of EU data law.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

This lecture focuses on the development and project financing of large international infrastructure projects, and covers –

• What is “project finance” and what is not? How does a “project financing” differ from other types of financing?
• Why is project finance used on large infrastructure projects? What is “leverage,” and why is that important?
• What legal structures and documents are commonly used in project financings?
• Who are the participants in a project financing? What are their roles?
• What is the role of the lawyer? Why should a new lawyer be familiar with project finance?

In discussing these issues, the speaker draws on his experience representing clients on projects in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Abstract: Reliance on agency-theoretic reasoning has led to substantial theoretical and empirical advances in company law scholarship, but the narrow focus on board-level actors and phenomena has disconnected the analysis of the company from the reality of the economic organisation it is meant to enable and support. We follow Oliver Williamson’s call for a ‘law, economics, and organization’ approach, and build on Elinor Ostrom’s ‘institutional analysis and development’ framework to propose a narrative model of the company in terms of nested levels of governance. We argue that our model works as a positive description of the law as it is, and puts us in a stronger position to evaluate the likely consequences of certain normative interventions, which we illustrate with some observations about ongoing debates in corporate governance.

The paper is jointly written by David Gindis and Eva Micheler and can be found at Taylor and Francis Online.

Eva Micheler studied law at the University of Vienna and at the University of Oxford before joining LSE Law School in 2001. She is a Professor of Law at the London School of Economics. Professor Micheler is also on the management committee of the Systemic Risk Centre at LSE. She was a TMR fellow at the Faculty of Law of the University of Oxford and teaches regularly at the University of Vienna and the Bucerius Law School in Hamburg.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Our Publicity team 📢 is very pleased to be debuting this new initiative, our ‘CULSCAST Conversations’ series, which aims to bring the Cambridge law community closer together through conversation. In addition to posting new content through our ‘CULSCAST Conversations’ and ‘Speakers Select’ series, we have made a collection of 2012-2023 CULS lectures and debates from our archives easily accessible. This collection covers a myriad of highly relevant discussion by leading academics and practitioners. For example: Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rwanda policy; Information Law in the Digital Revolution; Life at the Bar; and Litigating International Law.

Our Publicity team also runs CULS's socials. Give us a follow to get regular updates on the wonderful CULS events happening throughout term!

• Instagram: ⁠⁠@Cambridgelawsociety⁠⁠
• Facebook: ⁠⁠Cambridge University Law Society⁠

To find out more about CULS or become a CULS member, visit our ⁠⁠website ⁠⁠📝

About this episode:

• The host for today's episode is Jiwon Heo, a second-year student reading law at Cambridge, and one of CULS’s Publicity Officers.
• Beyond getting into the Christmas spirit (and perhaps some further reading) and gathering the energy to tackle Lent Term, we know that applications will be a big concern for many students this winter. Therefore, today we are bringing you an episode on Vacation Schemes with a panel of three final-year law students at Cambridge who have all secured TCs at firms which are household names in the city (see further information on our guests below).
• The contents of this episode were recorded at the Cambridge Law Faculty on the 29th November 2024.

The following is a list of our guests on this episode:

• Conor Hall, future trainee at Kirkland & Ellis (who also secured interviews with Slaughter and May, Skadden and Sidley Austin) and final-year undergraduate reading law at Selwyn College;
• Samuel Soh, future trainee at Latham & Watkins (who also did two successful Assessment Centres at other firms) and final-year undergraduate reading law at St Catharine's College; and
• Mila Lo, future trainee at Davis Polk (who also did a Vacation Scheme at another firm) and final-year undergraduate reading law at Pembroke College.

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this episode. Special thanks to Daniel Bates, Legal Research Training and Communications Specialist at the Cambridge Law Faculty, for his technical support and assistance in audio editing and production.

 Disclaimer: The insights provided by our guests in this episode were drawn from their experiences of Assessment Centres/Vacation schemes at various firms, and are not specific to any particular firm.

The Centre for English Legal History (CELH) was formally established in 2016 to provide a hub for researchers working in legal history across the University of Cambridge. The Centre holds regular seminars during academic terms, and an annual centrepiece lecture.

To find out more, and download the accompanying presentation, please refer to:

http://www.celh.law.cam.ac.uk/lectures

The enactment of the Divorce Reform Act 1969 was a landmark moment in family law. Coming into force in 1971, it had a significant impact on legal practice and was followed by a dramatic increase in divorce rates, reflecting changes in social attitudes.

Fifty Year of the Divorce Reform Act 1969 brought together scholars from law, sociology, history, demography, and film and literature, to reflect on the changes to divorce law and practice over the past 50 years, and the changing impact of divorce on different people in society, particularly women. As such, it presents a 'biography' of this important piece of legislation, moving from its conception and birth, through its reception and development, to its imminent demise. Looking to the future, and to the new law introduced by the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020. It hopes to suggest ways for evaluating what makes a 'good' divorce law.

Rebecca Probert’s research focuses on the law and history of marriage, bigamy, divorce and cohabitation. She is currently working on a history of bigamy from 1604 to the present day. Daniel Monk’s research has research has explored a wide range of issues relating to families, children, education and sexuality. His current research is about law and friendship and how to make family law visual.

Daniel Monk’s research has research has explored a wide range of issues relating to families, children, education and sexuality. His current research is about law and friendship and how to make family law visual.

This seminar was co-hosted by the Cambridge Socio-Legal Group, an interdisciplinary discussion forum promoting debate on topical socio-legal issues and empirical research methodology, and the Cambridge Family Law Centre.

The CSLG organises and supports events and publications relating to socio-legal research, drawing participants from within the University of Cambridge and around the world. A donation would be instrumental in allowing the Cambridge Socio-Legal Group to continue its cross-disciplinary work:

https://www.philanthropy.cam.ac.uk/give-to-cambridge/the-cambridge-socio-legal-group

Abstract: Is EU antitrust law resilient in the face of change? This question has acquired prominence amidst the many crises and disruptions of recent times, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and digitalisation. Attempts to answer it though have been rather narrow in scope and tend to employ the language of resilience casually. This article contributes to knowledge (a) by developing a conceptual framework for understanding and assessing legal resilience in administrative enforcement systems and (b) by applying it to Articles 101 and 102 TFEU with a view to investigating its ability to respond to change in a systematic manner. The analysis reveals that the current regime exhibits several design features that enable decisionmakers to make resilience choices as needed, and the resilience choices that have been made on various occasions are prima facie justifiable given the nature of the problem the European Commission and/or the EU Courts were faced with. However, certain aspects of the existing legal framework may weaken or limit EU antitrust law’s ability to deal with certain problems, in particular (very) complex ones, whereas some of the resilience choices that have been made have had implications for legal certainty, coherence and legitimacy that may not have been sufficiently appreciated so far. The article highlights the added value of a legal resilience perspective for effectively using EU antitrust law as a tool for tackling problems in an ever-changing world and demonstrates that, albeit not a panacea, such a perspective may reinforce the quality of enforcement and public’s trust in it.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners: https://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/centre-activities

For more information about CELS see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

In 1933, in the depths of the Great Depression, the Yale Law School and Harvard Business School launched an innovative joint program: the “Law-Business Course”. The program’s principal architect was Yale law professor William O. Douglas, best remembered today as the longest serving member of the US Supreme Court and one of the most provocative. For a short time, this remarkable academic initiative brought together professional schools at America’s two foremost universities, foreshadowing the interdisciplinary approach to law and business education that animate modern JD/MBA programs. The creation and short life of this unique academic collaboration provide a fascinating glimpse into the intellectual dynamism of early twentieth century business law education and the politics and practical exigencies facing academic pioneers of that important era. The story of this forward-thinking interdisciplinary perspective also offers important insights into current approaches to business law and, in particular, the pivotal role of modern finance theory in the development of the study, practice, and theory of corporate law today.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Abstract: What do we mean when we talk about the "horizontal direct effect" of the free movement provisions? You would think that, after decades of case law on the free movement provisions, the meaning of this concept should be relatively clear and crystallised. However, there is still a significant amount of disagreement about the very meaning of the concept of "horizontal direct effect". While some EU lawyers speak of horizontal direct effect when the free movement provisions are applied in a dispute between private parties (a procedural approach), other EU lawyers will only refer to horizontal direct effect when the rule or conduct that is being challenged is of a private nature (a substantive approach). This paper will analyse these different interpretations of the concept of horizontal direct effect through the lens of the "Familiapress dilemma". It will be argued that a distinction should be made between horizontal direct effect cases (in which private rules or actions are challenged in a dispute between private parties) and horizontal enforcement cases (in which State rules or actions are challenged in a dispute between private parties). The problem with a procedural approach to horizontal direct effect is that no connection is made between direct effect and the question of who is held responsible (and liable) for breaches of the free movement provisions. This makes it more difficult to provide effective judicial protection to victims of breaches of free movement law, because it is unclear who should ultimately "pay the bill". Against this background, it will be argued that the CJEU should develop more explicit techniques or "formulas" to allocate responsibility in free movement cases. In parallel, the CJEU should improve the effectiveness of the remedies of State liability and private liability for breaches of the free movement provisions.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Governance of companies has always involved some uncertainty and technology related challenges similarly add to the risks and challenges involved. Yet, corporate governance – both the legal and non-legal aspects – finds ways to address risks and so it will be with tech-related issues. This paper argues that effective corporate governance should now include a focus on ‘digital governance’ which I define as governance of technology and data related challenges. It will include questions of the role of AI and other technologies in making boards more effective, the governance of risks associated with the use of technology at all levels of the firm including considerations of fairness and bias when AI is used in some contexts, and data privacy and cybersecurity risks. While the paper does not call for a change in the core legal duties of directors, it proposes that soft law nudge companies to address tech-related risks. An obvious starting point is to encourage companies to appoint directors with tech expertise and constitute a tech committee where relevant. However, drawing from literature on independent directors and board diversity, the chapter notes that alterations to board composition is not a silver bullet. It must be part of a mindset where the risks posed by technology are treated seriously enough to necessitate strategies and practices beyond mere compliance with existing laws.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

The lecture begins at: 05:40

The Sir David Williams Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest lecturer in honour of Sir David Williams, Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of English Law and Emeritus Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University.

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for Public Law website at:

https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/sir-david-williams-lectures

Our Publicity team 📢 is very pleased to be debuting this new initiative, our ‘CULSCAST Conversations’ series, which aims to bring the Cambridge law community closer together through conversation. In addition to posting new content through our ‘CULSCAST Conversations’ and ‘Speakers Select’ series, we have made a collection of 2012-2023 CULS lectures and debates from our archives easily accessible. This collection covers a myriad of highly relevant discussion by leading academics and practitioners. For example: Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rwanda policy; Information Law in the Digital Revolution; Life at the Bar; and Litigating International Law.

Our Publicity team also runs CULS's socials. Give us a follow to get regular updates on the wonderful CULS events happening throughout term!

• Instagram: ⁠⁠@Cambridgelawsociety⁠⁠
• Facebook: ⁠⁠Cambridge University Law Society⁠

To find out more about CULS or become a CULS member, visit our ⁠⁠website⁠⁠ 📝

About this episode:

• The host for today's episode is Jiwon Heo, a second-year student reading law at Cambridge, and one of CULS’s Publicity Officers.
• To introduce you to our CULS team working together to bring the world of law alive for our community, in this episode we present a series of interviews from across our almost 20 specialised departments. Each interview shines a light on the particular experiences, skills and perspectives which drive the work our team does.
• The contents of this episode were recorded at our ‘MEET the Committee’ event on the 12th October 2024.

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this episode. The following is a list of our interviewees from our 2024-2025 CULS Committee:

Executive Team:

• President – Joyce Mau
• Vice-President – Qinglan Du
• Treasurer – Li Ren Liew
• Secretary – Alldon Garren Tan
• Moots: Matthew Lee, Thomas Loke, Ben Mays
• Socials: Isabella McNicholas
• Non-Law: Rachel Ng, Yasmine Kemp, Aila Ahmed
• Careers: Natalie Tong, Joel Chan, Caitlin Ng
• D&I: Dineshtga Frandsen
• Pro Bono: Joy Magomba
• Alumni Relations: Zamry Rizwan
• Law Ball: Seetal Kaur

In this lecture on 3 July 2024, Dr Tom Hawker-Dawson (Brenda Hale Fellow in Law, Girton College) discusses process of applying to study Law at Cambridge.

You can download the slides from this presentation from:

https://resources.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/open_day/open_day_2024_applying_to_cambridge.pdf

The general talks given at this Open Day are available to listen to in this podcast, or can be watched on YouTube.

The Open Day programme:

• Welcome to the Faculty: Professor Mark Elliott
• Law at Cambridge: Dr Christina Angelopoulos
• Without Lawful Excuse: Professor Findlay StarkLegal Problems: Professor Janet O'Sullivan & Professor Graham Virgo
• Applying to Cambridge Law: Dr Tom Hawker-Dawson

For more information about the Undergraduate BA Law Tripos Degree please refer to:

http://ba.law.cam.ac.uk

In this lecture on 3 July 2024, Professor Findlay Stark gives an interactive lecture on the law of criminal damage.

You can download the slides from this presentation from:

https://resources.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/open_day/open_day_2024_without_lawful_excuse.pdf

The general talks given at this Open Day are available to listen to in this podcast, or can be watched on YouTube.

The Open Day programme:

• Welcome to the Faculty: Professor Mark Elliott
• Law at Cambridge: Dr Christina Angelopoulos
• Without Lawful Excuse: Professor Findlay StarkLegal Problems: Professor Janet O'Sullivan & Professor Graham Virgo
• Applying to Cambridge Law: Dr Tom Hawker-Dawson

For more information about the Undergraduate BA Law Tripos Degree please refer to:

http://ba.law.cam.ac.uk

In this lecture on 3 July 2024, Professor Janet O'Sullivan and Professor Graham Virgo give attendees an idea of what a Law supervision is like, by leading a discussion on a handful of legal questions.

You can download the slides from this presentation from:

https://resources.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/open_day/open_day_2024_legal_problems.pdf

The general talks given at this Open Day are available to listen to in this podcast, or can be watched on YouTube.

The Open Day programme:

• Welcome to the Faculty: Professor Mark Elliott
• Law at Cambridge: Dr Christina Angelopoulos
• Without Lawful Excuse: Professor Findlay StarkLegal Problems: Professor Janet O'Sullivan & Professor Graham Virgo
• Applying to Cambridge Law: Dr Tom Hawker-Dawson

For more information about the Undergraduate BA Law Tripos Degree please refer to:

http://ba.law.cam.ac.uk

In this lecture on 3 July 2024, Dr Christina Angelopoulos (Associate Professor & Director of Tripos) discusses the benefits of studying Law, and the nature of Law at Cambridge.

You can download the slides from this presentation from:

https://resources.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/open_day/open_day_2024_the_cambridge_law_course.pdf

The general talks given at this Open Day are available to listen to in this podcast, or can be watched on YouTube.

The Open Day programme:

• Welcome to the Faculty: Professor Mark Elliott
• Law at Cambridge: Dr Christina Angelopoulos
• Without Lawful Excuse: Professor Findlay StarkLegal Problems: Professor Janet O'Sullivan & Professor Graham Virgo
• Applying to Cambridge Law: Dr Tom Hawker-Dawson

For more information about the Undergraduate BA Law Tripos Degree please refer to:

http://ba.law.cam.ac.uk

In this lecture on 3 July 2024, Professor Mark Elliott (Chairman of the Faculty) welcome attendees to the Faculty.

The general talks given at this Open Day are available to listen to in this podcast, or can be watched on YouTube.

The Open Day programme:

• Welcome to the Faculty: Professor Mark Elliott
• Law at Cambridge: Dr Christina Angelopoulos
• Without Lawful Excuse: Professor Findlay StarkLegal Problems: Professor Janet O'Sullivan & Professor Graham Virgo
• Applying to Cambridge Law: Dr Tom Hawker-Dawson

For more information about the Undergraduate BA Law Tripos Degree please refer to:

http://ba.law.cam.ac.uk

Eileen Dong, a renowned UN Ambassador, distinguished member of the US Committee for Refugees & Immigrants Advisory Board, and expert in combating human trafficking, will explore the critical intersections between UN’s 2030 Global Goals and the ongoing efforts to address gender-based violence and human trafficking. Drawing from her extensive experience and multidisciplinary approach, Ambassador Dong sheds light on the vital role of cross-sector collaborations in addressing human rights violations and gender-based violence.

Serving as the Founder and Executive Director of Hope Pyx Global as well as a consultant for US Center for Countering Human Trafficking, Homeland Security Investigations, Department of Justice, US Attorney’s Office, and US Citizenship and Immigration Services, Dong has committed her work to eliminating abuse, exploitation, trafficking, violence, and torture, while building safe spaces for survivors from all backgrounds. Dong's expertise has been recognized at prestigious events such as the UNODC World Day Against Trafficking in Persons and the OSCE Conference of the Alliance against Trafficking in Persons. Her innovative approaches encourage cross-sector, intergenerational, and multidisciplinary collaborations “glocally”.

Dong has played a pivotal role in advising on the UN's Declaration of Human Rights by the American Youth, aimed at eliminating abuse and exploitation, and participating in the Department of Homeland Security’s Roundtable, offering invaluable insights to enhance policies and programs in investigating human trafficking cases, as well as improving support for survivors. Furthermore, Dong successfully testified in favor of the passage of TX SB 49, resulting in almost tripling the crime victims’ compensation, and the allocation of $1 million for the first Trauma Recovery Center in Texas. Presently, she is engaged in collaborative efforts with international NGOs towards international treaties to end violence against women and girls.

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/

Additional resources:

Global Goals (Sustainable Development Goals): https://www.globalgoals.org/goals/

Core International Human Rights Treaties: https://www.ohchr.org/en/core-international-human-rights-instruments-and-their-monitoring-bodies

CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (un.org): https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/

Book: "Thank Your Predator: A Guide to Trauma Recovery from Abuse": https://a.co/d/bIkDsuG

Polaris Project: Love and Trafficking: https://youtu.be/1RQTd6WeS2Q

TED Talk: Things You Don't Know about Human Trafficking | Eileen Dong: https://youtu.be/DVrwyvNUzMY?si=axpEJF73kUphK1px

To stay to updated on upcoming events and information: Eileen Dong: https://www.EileenDong.com

Hope Pyx Global: https://www.HopePyxGlobal.org

LinkedIn:

• https://www.linkedin.com/in/eileen-dong/
• https://www.linkedin.com/in/hope-pyx-global/

jktta4v2

For more information, see the Squire Law Library website at:

http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive

Chair: Felix Steffek (University of Cambridge)

Abstract: The notion of stock-market-driven short-termism relentlessly whittling away at the American economy’s foundations is widely accepted and highly salient. Presidential candidates state as much. Senators introduce bills assuming as much. Corporate interests argue as much to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the corporate law courts. Yet the academic evidence as to the problem’s severity is no more than mixed. What explains this gap between widespread belief and weak evidence?

Bio: Mark J. Roe is a professor at Harvard Law School, where he teaches corporate law and corporate bankruptcy. His research interests cover bankruptcy (corporate bankruptcy and reorganization), corporate law and corporate finance. He wrote Strong Managers, Weak Owners: The Political Roots of American Corporate Finance (Princeton, 1994), Political Determinants of Corporate Governance (Oxford, 2003), and Bankruptcy and Corporate Reorganization (Foundation, 2014). Academic articles include: Stock-Market Short-Termism’s Economy-Wide Impact (forthcoming); Containing Systemic Risk by Taxing Banks Properly, 35 Yale Journal on Regulation 181 (2018), Financial Markets and the Political Center of Gravity, 2 J. Law, Finance, and Accounting 125 (2017) (with Travis Coan); Bankruptcy’s Three Ages, 7 Harvard Business Law Review 187 (2017); Corporate Structural Degradation Due to Too-Big-to-Fail Finance, 162 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1419 (2014); Corporate Short-Termism — In the Boardroom and in the Courtroom, 68 Business Lawyer 977 (2013); and Breaking Bankruptcy Priority: How Rent-Seeking Upends the Creditors’ Bargain, 99 Virginia Law Review 1235 (2013) (with Frederick Tung).

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Abstract: On 18 September 2023 the Group of 12 Experts from both France and Germany released their proposal ‘Sailing on High Seas: Reforming and Enlarging the EU for the 21st Century’. The Group make two proposals on the Rule of Law and five further proposals for institutional reform. Overall, the Group had three objectives to increase the EU’s capacity to act, to get the institutions ready for enlargement and strengthen democratic legitimacy and rule of law. This resulted in a series of proposals for inter alia treaty change. The proposals are all on a continuum but largely aim for reform rather than a recreation of the European Union. They align with other reform proposals and at times take up proposals that were made for EU reform in the past or indeed discussed during the EU Constitutional convention process in the early 2000s. The objective here was clearly reformation rather than revolution. This conversation discusses some of the individual reform proposals in the context of the practice of the Court of Justice – could these proposal mean the beginning of 'Europe’s Second Constitution'?

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Abstract: As an AG Professor Sharpston worked on religious discrimination and employment matters, delivering an opinion in one of the first two hijab cases (Bougnaoui) and then the ‘shadow opinion’ in Wabe and Müller, which she posted via Professor Steve Peers’ EU law blog after leaving the Court. She has already compared Achbita and Bougnaoui to the decisions in Egenberger and the Caritas hospital case (IR v JQ) in her festschrift contribution for Allan Rosas. Unsurprisingly, she has been keeping an eye open for further developments in that case law (WABE and Müller, S.C.R.L (Religious clothing) and, most recently, Commune d’Ans (Grand Chamber, 28 November 2023). Additionally, she has also been looking at what the Court has been saying in relation to ritual slaughter of animals (as required for meat-eating observant Jews and Muslims). Notable cases include Liga van Moskeeën, Oeuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs (OABA) and Centraal Israëlitisch Constistorie. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights also addresses these issues: Eweida v UK on religious symbols in the workplace, and the very recent decision (13 February 2024) in Executief van de Moslims van België and Others v Belgium on banning ritual slaughter of animals without prior stunning. The cases are constitutionally important in terms of the deference shown to Member States; and in some respects, they are troubling for anyone who is religious and non-Christian.

Discussion chaired by Dr Markus W. Gehring, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law and Member of CELS.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Carême v. France - https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-233261

Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and 32 Others - https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-233174

Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland - https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-233206

In this video, Dr Stefan Theil discusses the extent to which the ECHR is prepared to dictate how countries might implement their own climate change policies.

Stefan Theil is Assistant Professor in Public Law and a Fellow and Director of Studies at Sidney Sussex College. In Stefan's recent book 'Towards the Environmental Minimum' (Cambridge University Press, 2021) he argues for the recognition of a comprehensive framework that addresses the relationship between human rights and environmental harm.

For more information about Dr Theil, please refer to his profile at:

https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/s-theil/6578

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

For more information, see the Squire Law Library website at:

http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive

The 2024 Baron Ver Heyden de Lancey Lecture on Medico-Legal Studies was delivered by Professor Sir Jonathan Montgomery of University College London on 21 March 2024, and was entitled "Medicine and the Rule of Law".

For more information about the Baron Ver Heyden de Lancey Lecture series, please see:

http://www.lml.law.cam.ac.uk/events/vhdl-events

Cambridge 3CL invites you to a seminar on the responsible investment strategies of Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), the entity responsible for managing Norway's government pension fund, valued at over 1 trillion US dollars. Operating in over 70 countries, NBIM is at the forefront of shaping sustainable and fair market practices globally. This session will delve into NBIM’s role in policy-making and standard setting, highlighting its commitment to responsible stewardship.

The focus will be on NBIM's active investment approach across various levels - from market-wide initiatives to individual company engagements. NBIM works to ensure long-term growth in its investments while minimizing environmental and societal harm, through direct company engagement, goal setting, and strategic voting at shareholder meetings. Key topics like climate change action, responsible AI practices, and CEO compensation will be discussed, showcasing NBIM's dedication to guiding global investments towards ethical and sustainable outcomes.

Leading this session is Elisa Cencig, Senior ESG Policy Advisor at NBIM. Her expertise will provide a comprehensive view into how a major global investor like NBIM navigates the complexities of responsible investment.

Biography: Elisa is Senior ESG Policy Advisor at Norges Bank Investment Management, where she is responsible for the fund’s engagement with international organisations, standard-setters and policymakers on sustainability, responsible investment and corporate governance. Prior to that, she worked at the UK Financial Authority, first on EU Withdrawal Policy and Strategy and more recently leading the FCA’s engagement at the Financial Stability Board. Earlier in her career, she worked at the Association of Financial Markets in Europe’s Brussels office on prudential and resolution policy and advocacy. She is an alumna of the Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies in Pisa (Italy) and the College of Europe (Belgium) and holds a PhD in Political Science from the London School of Economics.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Biography: José Manuel Durão Barroso served twelve years in the Government of Portugal including as Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Minister. He was President of the European Commission during two mandates (2004/2014).

His academic appointments include visiting professor at Georgetown University and visiting professor at Princeton University. He is currently a visiting professor at the Catholic University of Portugal and at the European University Institute, School of Transnational Governance, Florence. José Manuel Barroso studied Law (University of Lisbon) Political Science and International Affairs (University of Geneva).

He is currently Chair of the Board of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and Chairman of International Advisors, Goldman Sachs.

For more information see:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Lusina Ho is Harold Hsiao-Wo Lee Professor in Trust and Equity at the Faculty of Law, the University of Hong Kong. While pursuing her teaching and research in Trust, Restitution, and Comparative Trust Law (in particular Chinese Trust Law), she has been consulted by the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the enactment of the Chinese Trust Law and the Government of the Hong Kong SAR on the reform of the Trustee Ordinance. In 2019, she has successfully convinced the Hong Kong SAR Government to launch a trust service for special needs individuals in the territory.

She has published widely and her work has been cited in highest appellate courts in common law jurisdictions, and has been translated and published in Japanese. She received from HKU the Outstanding Young Researcher Award in 2006, the Faculty Outstanding Teaching Award in 2017, the Faculty Knowledge Exchange Award in 2018, and the University Knowledge Award in 2018.

Timings:

• Professor Lionel Smith - Introduction: 00:00
• Dr Sinead Agnew - Introduction: 04:23
• Professor Lusina Ho: 07:00
• Dr Brian Sloan - Thanks: 50:15

The Cambridge Freshfields Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest of the Cambridge Private Law Centre, and the event is sponsored by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.

More information about this lecture, including a transcript and photographs from the event, is available from the Private Law Centre website:

https://www.privatelaw.law.cam.ac.uk/events/CambridgeFreshfieldsLecture

The Cambridge Pro Bono Project is a research centre that draws on the subject-matter expertise of graduate researchers and Faculty experts to produce reports on a wide range of public interest matters. Every year, we invite distinguished speakers to address our researchers, staff, and students at the University of Cambridge. This year's Cambridge Pro Bono Project Annual Lecture will be delivered by Professor Christine Chinkin and chaired by Professor Surabhi Ranganathan, Professor of International Law and Deputy Director of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law.

Professor Chinkin, FBA is the founding Director of the Centre for Women, Peace, and Security and Emeritus Professor of International Law at the London School of Economics and Political Science. During her illustrious career, she has served on the Human Rights Advisory Panel established by UNMIK in Kosovo and as Scientific Advisor to the Council of Europe’s Committee for the drafting of the Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence. She is Chair of the International Law Association.

In commemorating the recent 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Professor Chinkin will speak to how human rights law has engaged with women as subjects and agents in international law, with a focus on the women, peace and security context. She will share her valuable insights into the historical challenges, current opportunities, and the anticipated contributions of practitioners, academics, and researchers.

https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/

Abstract: This lecture will focus on the development and project financing of large international infrastructure projects, and will cover –

- What is “project finance” and what is not? How does a “project financing” differ from other types of financing?

- Why is project finance used on large infrastructure projects? What is “leverage,” and why is that important?

- What legal structures and documents are commonly used in project financings?

- Who are the participants in a project financing? What are their roles?

- What is the role of the lawyer? Why should a new lawyer be familiar with project finance?

In discussing these issues, the speaker will draw on his experience representing clients on projects in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information:

https://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Bio: Dr Joanna Kusiak is a scholar-activist who works at the University of Cambridge. Born in Poland, she has been shaped by the emancipatory tradition of the Solidarność movement and by the brutality of the neoliberal transformation. Her work focuses on urban land, housing crises, and the progressive potential of law. In 2021 she was one of the spokespeople of Deutsche Wohnen & Co enteignen, Berlin’s successful referendum campaign to expropriate stock-listed landlords. She is the winner of the 2023 Nine Dots Prize for ’thinking about the box’ about contemporary social challenges. Her winning book ‘Radically Legal: Berlin Constitutes the Future’ will appear in May 2023 in Cambridge University Press.

Do we need a revolution to save our cities from the rampant housing crisis? Yes – but this revolution is powered by the law. Right in the middle of the German constitution, a group of ordinary citizen discovers a forgotten clause that allows them to take 240.000 homes back from multi-billion corporations. My talk describes the story of a grassroots movement that convinced one million Berliners to pop the speculative housing bubble a design a new institutional model for managing urban housing.

For more about the Cambridge Socio-Legal Group see:

https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/researchfaculty-centres-networks-and-groups/cambridge-socio-legal-group

Prison, the cliché goes, serves as a mirror of society. Films about prison, according to a similarly clichéd logic, serve as a window onto that mirror of society. In this presentation, I move beyond this focus on reflection and refraction to propose a more materially sensitive approach to what prison-based films can tell us about state and society. I reflect on the institutional relationships between the film industry and prisons to show how the very production and exhibition of film—not just the symbolic force of the image itself—reconfigure the relationships between imprisoned people, non-imprisoned people, and the state. Focussing on Argentina, I consider examples of location shooting inside operational prisons, the use of imprisoned people as actors, and the exhibition of film inside prison from the 1930s through to the present day to trouble a tendency among academic lawyers, criminologists, and film scholars to evaluate prison films in terms of their ‘accurate’ or ‘inaccurate’ representation of real-life prisons. By shifting our focus from the truth value of the strictly defined ‘prison film’ towards the broader social relationships produced at the institutional interstice of prison and film, we can better understand prison, following Ruth Wilson Gilmore, not as a ‘building “over there” but a set of relationships that undermine rather than stabilize everyday lives everywhere’ (2007, 242).

The Cambridge Socio-Legal Group organises and supports events and publications relating to socio-legal research, drawing participants from within the University of Cambridge and around the world. For more about the CSLG, see:

https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/researchfaculty-centres-networks-and-groups/cambridge-socio-legal-group

The CSLG organises and supports events and publications relating to socio-legal research, drawing participants from within the University of Cambridge and around the world. A donation would be instrumental in allowing the Cambridge Socio-Legal Group to continue its cross-disciplinary work:

https://www.philanthropy.cam.ac.uk/give-to-cambridge/the-cambridge-socio-legal-group

The presentation will look at why England and Wales has, historically, been a 'good forum to shop in' for commercial dispute resolution. It will then consider four challenges to its ability to maintain that position, before turning to practical steps that could and, perhaps should, be taken to enable it to remain a forum of choice for commercial disputes.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information:

https://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

In this short video Dr Jonathan Rogers explains the background, explores the challenges that will face those who draft the legislation, and comments further on the likely reservations that many will still entertain about this innovation.

Jonathan Rogers is Associate Professor in Criminal Justice at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. He co-founded the Criminal Law Reform Now Network (http://www.clrnn.co.uk/) in 2017 and leads an ongoing project by that network into the reform of private prosecutions, and in that capacity he gave evidence to the Justice Select Committee in 2020 on safeguards in the wake of the Post Office scandal.

For more information about Dr Rogers, you can also refer to his profile at:

https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/jw-rogers/78191

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

For more information, see the Squire Law Library website at http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive

For more information, see the Squire website at http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive

In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill.

Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject.

For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

The 2023 Mackenzie-Stuart Lecture was delivered by President Síofra O'Leary, ECHR under the title 'Why the European Convention on Human Rights still matters' on 30 November 2023.

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for European Legal Studies website at:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/mackenzie-stuart-lectures

Abstract: The Structured Finance seminar is intended to be a primer on understanding key concepts of these complex financial instruments and their benefits/limitations. The seminar will cover securitisation trades (both traditional (or cash) securitisations and synthetics) as well as covered bonds. The presentation will further explain what different types of those trades are used for as well as provide examples of typical structures. In the discussion part, the seminar can dive deeper into topics of interest for the audience such as ABS securities, CLN notes and covered bonds.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website at:

http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Abstract: The CJEU is a court that speaks through a single judgment, and that ‘dialogues’ with its Advocates General without ever saying quite what that dialogue means. What is the reader to make of the interplay between the individual opinion of the advocate general and the collective decision of the judges? The final seminar in the series asks some questions, suggests some partial answers, and invites reflection on whether the current arrangements should ‘evolve’ (and, if so, in what direction).

For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

- Dr Tom Hickman KC: Overruling the Supreme Court’s Rwanda Judgment – what role now for Parliament?

- Dr Stefan Theil: Preventing judicial review of the Rwanda policy: practical and legal difficulties

For more information see the CULS website at: https://culs.org.uk

Abstract: The UK and EU relationship has not been straight forward since Brexit but since Rishi Sunak became Prime Minister a certain amount of pragmatism has prevailed. Meanwhile, the European Union is facing significant geo-political challenges – not least the war in Ukraine and the Israel-Palestine conflict. Does it have capacity to think about these broader issues? The Ukraine conflict has led to much deeper thinking about enlargement of the EU, not just for Ukraine but also the Baltic states. The question of Europe of concentric circles has been raised again. What might a Europe of concentric circles mean for the accession and neighbourhood countries? What else can be done to improver relations with our closest trading partner?

For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

The Centre for English Legal History (CELH) was formally established in 2016 to provide a hub for researchers working in legal history across the University of Cambridge. The Centre holds regular seminars during academic terms, and an annual centrepiece lecture.

To find out more, and download the accompanying presentation, please refer to: http://www.celh.law.cam.ac.uk/lectures

This talk defined the distinct but overlapping concepts of miscarriages of justice, wrongful convictions and proven innocence. The three distinct and overlapping concepts are analysed as what Guido Calabresi and Philip Bobbitt have called a 'tragic choice' approach to allocating scarce resources.

For more information about the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice (CCCJ) see: https://www.cccj.law.cam.ac.uk/

In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps.

Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference.

For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Abstract: According to a widely received concept coined by Hansmann/Kraakman, “asset partitioning” denotes a bundle of doctrines surrounding the relationship of business owners as well as their business and private creditors, so-called entity shielding and owner shielding. Often, this configuration is associated with a legal entity, e.g., providing the “corporate veil” which allegedly protects owners’ assets from business creditors. Contrary to this intuition, it will be shown that legal personality, while offering a metaphorical framework for asset partitioning, is no institutionally indispensable prerequisite for it. To support this claim, we will look at historical and contemporary comparative evidence from continental-European as well as Middle- and South-American legal orders. This allows us to compare asset partitioning with and without legal personality and evaluate the policy implications of each.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website at http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Abstract: A common complaint of common lawyers is that the way in which CJEU judgments are written is abstract and obscure. The criticism is levelled most notably at judgments that reply to requests for a preliminary ruling from national courts. Once you understand about language and the Court, there are a lot of hidden clues, if you only know where to look for them. This second seminar is designed to help you squeeze the maximum information out of the text, and alert you to what those formulae you’re reading really mean.

For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

For further details on ‘Principles of Corporate Finance Law’, please see the OUP website at https://global.oup.com/academic/product/principles-of-corporate-finance-law-9780198854074

The Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law (3CL) runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics and high-profile practitioners. This seminar was presented in cooperation with SMU School of Law who joined via Zoom.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website at http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Abstract: The CJEU is unique in having 24 equally valid languages of procedure, plus an informal and unofficial working language (French) which is not necessarily spoken by as great a percentage of staff members in 2023 as it was when the Court was first set up by the original six founding Member States. What does running a 24-language court mean in theory and in practice? How does the diversity of language – and indeed of legal tradition (in the sense of how legal argument is presented) – impact upon the way the CJEU functions, how it handles its caseload, and how it writes its judgments?

For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Abstract: This presentation, based on Professor Steinberg’s recent Oxford University Press book Rethinking Securities Law, which was awarded Winner — Best Law Book of 2021 by the American Book Fest Awards, focuses on the need to “rethink” the U.S. securities laws — with particular emphasis on the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (and as amended). In both transactional and litigation settings, with frequency, U.S. securities law mandates apply that are erratic and antithetical to sound public policy. The objective of this book — and the presentation — is to highlight the deficiencies that exist under the current regimen, address their failings, provide recommendations for rectifying these deficiencies, and set forth a thorough analysis for remediation in order to prescribe a consistent and sound securities law framework. The book has received widespread favorable reviews from both practitioners and academicians. Professor Steinberg will focus on several key subjects that are addressed in the book.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website at http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

For more information, see the Squire website at http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/

She represents victims of modern slavery and human trafficking in their cases and during her 26-year legal career she has set critical trafficking precedents in the Courts with national and global reach, most recently in a landmark judgment on non-punishment of the European Court of Human Rights in 2021, VCL and AN v UK, which concerned trafficked Vietnamese minors wrongly convicted of cannabis cultivation which their traffickers had required them to perform.

She works closely with NGOs and international organisations, provides trafficking training, including for judges, lawyers NGOs and prosecutors, and has advised on domestic and international legislation, including aspects of the Modern Slavery Act 2015. She has published two books, including ‘The Human Trafficking Handbook: Recognising Trafficking and Modern-Day Slavery in the UK’ (LexisNexis, 2011). She is a co-author of the Council of Europe’s comprehensive e-learning course on ‘Combatting Human Trafficking’ (2018 & 2023 edition publication pending).

In 2015 she received the ‘Trafficking in Persons Hero Award’ from John Kerry and the Obama administration for her outstanding work in the field. In 2018 she received the distinction of being appointed the first Professor of Practice in Modern Slavery Law at King’s College London where she teaches her own LLM course. In 2021 she represented the UN Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons in two cases of significance, including in her third party intervention in the Supreme Court in Basfar and Wong, which lifted the diplomatic veil of immunity in a global landmark case concerning a female migrant domestic worker trafficked into the UK for exploitation.

Many of her landmark legal cases have involved critical issues concerning race and gender and she highlights these and bring her personal observations on how these impacted victim protection in her talk.

This lecture was delivered at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, on 11 May 2023 as part of the series of Law and Race talks.

Supported by the Centre for Public Law: https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/

The Sir David Williams Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest lecturer in honour of Sir David Williams, Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of English Law and Emeritus Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University.

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for Public Law website at:

http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/sir-david-williams-lectures

The Centre for English Legal History (CELH) was formally established in 2016 to provide a hub for researchers working in legal history across the University of Cambridge. The Centre holds regular seminars during academic terms, and an annual centrepiece lecture.

Sir Ross Cranston is a former Judge of the High Court of England and Wales, who sat in Commercial Court and in 2016 became the judge in charge of the Administrative Court. He is professor of law at the London School of Economics (LSE), where before appointment to the bench he was Sir Ernest Cassel professor of commercial law and Centennial professor of law. Prior to the LSE, he was director of the Centre for Commercial Law Studies at Queen Mary, University of London.

To find out more, and download the accompanying presentation, please refer to: http://www.celh.law.cam.ac.uk/lectures

On 27 March 2023 the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice held a workshop in honour of Nicky Padfield entitled 'Criminal Justice Conversations: Experiencing and Researching Criminal Justice'.

In September 2022, Professor Nicky Padfield formally retired from the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge. She has left an indelible mark, as a leading criminologist and criminal justice scholar, and former Recorder. Whilst best known for her work in sentencing, prisons and, recently, on the Parole Board, she has shown an unparalleled flexibility in teaching and research, much of which went beyond academic audiences.

This workshop, kindly supported by the Yorke Fund, will celebrate Nicky’s career and enable participants to reflect upon themes which were prevalent in her research, such as managerialism and accountability within (criminal justice) public services, and fairness and proportionality in sentencing, parole and recalls to prison. Participants will consider the gains to be made for researchers in having conversations with those who act within the criminal justice system and (too often overlooked) those who are at the receiving end of state power, and how such gains in understanding their everyday experiences may be reflected in research outputs and policy documents.

Programme of recordings:

- Introduction (Dr Findlay Stark, Co-Director of CCCJ, University of Cambridge); 'Telling it like it is, a talk in honour of Nicky Padfield' (Prof Em Loraine Gelsthorpe, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226608)

- 'Talking about private prosecutions' (Dr Jonathan Rogers, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226623)

- 'Some thoughts on parole' (Prof Em Sir Anthony Bottoms, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226638)

- 'Reflections on Criminal Justice Conversations' (Prof Em Nicky Padfield, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226653)

On 27 March 2023 the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice held a workshop in honour of Nicky Padfield entitled 'Criminal Justice Conversations: Experiencing and Researching Criminal Justice'.

In September 2022, Professor Nicky Padfield formally retired from the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge. She has left an indelible mark, as a leading criminologist and criminal justice scholar, and former Recorder. Whilst best known for her work in sentencing, prisons and, recently, on the Parole Board, she has shown an unparalleled flexibility in teaching and research, much of which went beyond academic audiences.

This workshop, kindly supported by the Yorke Fund, will celebrate Nicky’s career and enable participants to reflect upon themes which were prevalent in her research, such as managerialism and accountability within (criminal justice) public services, and fairness and proportionality in sentencing, parole and recalls to prison. Participants will consider the gains to be made for researchers in having conversations with those who act within the criminal justice system and (too often overlooked) those who are at the receiving end of state power, and how such gains in understanding their everyday experiences may be reflected in research outputs and policy documents.

Programme of recordings:

- Introduction (Dr Findlay Stark, Co-Director of CCCJ, University of Cambridge); 'Telling it like it is, a talk in honour of Nicky Padfield' (Prof Em Loraine Gelsthorpe, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226608)

- 'Talking about private prosecutions' (Dr Jonathan Rogers, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226623)

- 'Some thoughts on parole' (Prof Em Sir Anthony Bottoms, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226638)

- 'Reflections on Criminal Justice Conversations' (Prof Em Nicky Padfield, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226653)

On 27 March 2023 the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice held a workshop in honour of Nicky Padfield entitled 'Criminal Justice Conversations: Experiencing and Researching Criminal Justice'.

In September 2022, Professor Nicky Padfield formally retired from the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge. She has left an indelible mark, as a leading criminologist and criminal justice scholar, and former Recorder. Whilst best known for her work in sentencing, prisons and, recently, on the Parole Board, she has shown an unparalleled flexibility in teaching and research, much of which went beyond academic audiences.

This workshop, kindly supported by the Yorke Fund, will celebrate Nicky’s career and enable participants to reflect upon themes which were prevalent in her research, such as managerialism and accountability within (criminal justice) public services, and fairness and proportionality in sentencing, parole and recalls to prison. Participants will consider the gains to be made for researchers in having conversations with those who act within the criminal justice system and (too often overlooked) those who are at the receiving end of state power, and how such gains in understanding their everyday experiences may be reflected in research outputs and policy documents.

Programme of recordings:

- Introduction (Dr Findlay Stark, Co-Director of CCCJ, University of Cambridge); 'Telling it like it is, a talk in honour of Nicky Padfield' (Prof Em Loraine Gelsthorpe, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226608)

- 'Talking about private prosecutions' (Dr Jonathan Rogers, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226623)

- 'Some thoughts on parole' (Prof Em Sir Anthony Bottoms, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226638)

- 'Reflections on Criminal Justice Conversations' (Prof Em Nicky Padfield, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226653)

On 27 March 2023 the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice held a workshop in honour of Nicky Padfield entitled 'Criminal Justice Conversations: Experiencing and Researching Criminal Justice'.

In September 2022, Professor Nicky Padfield formally retired from the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge. She has left an indelible mark, as a leading criminologist and criminal justice scholar, and former Recorder. Whilst best known for her work in sentencing, prisons and, recently, on the Parole Board, she has shown an unparalleled flexibility in teaching and research, much of which went beyond academic audiences.

This workshop, kindly supported by the Yorke Fund, will celebrate Nicky’s career and enable participants to reflect upon themes which were prevalent in her research, such as managerialism and accountability within (criminal justice) public services, and fairness and proportionality in sentencing, parole and recalls to prison. Participants will consider the gains to be made for researchers in having conversations with those who act within the criminal justice system and (too often overlooked) those who are at the receiving end of state power, and how such gains in understanding their everyday experiences may be reflected in research outputs and policy documents.

Programme of recordings:

- Introduction (Dr Findlay Stark, Co-Director of CCCJ, University of Cambridge); 'Telling it like it is, a talk in honour of Nicky Padfield' (Prof Em Loraine Gelsthorpe, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226608)

- 'Talking about private prosecutions' (Dr Jonathan Rogers, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226623)

- 'Some thoughts on parole' (Prof Em Sir Anthony Bottoms, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226638)

- 'Reflections on Criminal Justice Conversations' (Prof Em Nicky Padfield, University of Cambridge) (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/4226653)

Emily Jackson is Professor of Law at the London School of Economics. She is a member of the British Medical Association Medical Ethics Committee, and until 2012, she was Deputy Chair of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. From 2014-2017, she was a Judicial Appointments Commissioner. She is a Fellow of the British Academy, and in 2017 was awarded an OBE for services to higher education.

Baron Cornelius Ver Heyden de Lancey (1889-1984) was a wealthy and public-spirited Dutchman who at different times in his life was a dentist, doctor, surgeon, barrister and art historian. In 1970 he created the De Lancey and De La Hanty Foundation, to promote studies in medico-legal topics. The Foundation generously gave Cambridge the Ver Heyden de Lancey Fund, which since 1996 has funded occasional public lectures on medico-legal issues of current interest.

For more information about the Baron Ver Heyden de Lancey Lecture series, please see http://www.lml.law.cam.ac.uk/events/vhdl-events

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website at http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners.

For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website at http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Philip James Sales, Lord Sales became a Justice of the Supreme Court in January 2019. Lord Sales was educated at the Royal Grammar School in Guildford, before reading law at both Churchill College, Cambridge, and Worcester College, Oxford.

He was called to the Bar of England and Wales at Lincoln's Inn in 1985 and was appointed First Treasury Junior Counsel in 1997. He was an Assistant Recorder from 1999 to 2001, Recorder from 2001 and 2008, and Deputy High Court Judge from 2004 and 2008. Lord Sales became a Queen's Counsel in 2006 and continued to act in the re-named post of First Treasury Counsel Common Law until his appointment to the High Court, Chancery Division in 2008. He was a member of the Competition Appeal Tribunal between 2008 and 2015, and Vice-President of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal between 2014 and 2015. Between 2009 and 2014 Lord Sales served as Deputy Chair of the Boundary Commission for England. He was appointed as a Lord Justice of Appeal in 2014.

Timings:

• Professor Lionel Smith Introduction: 00:00
• Professor Pippa Rogerson Introduction: 07:46
• Lord Sales: 11:46
• Professor Graham Virgo Thanks: 56:17

The Cambridge Freshfields Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest of the Cambridge Private Law Centre, and the event is sponsored by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Private Law Centre website:

https://www.privatelaw.law.cam.ac.uk/events/special-events

Commentator: Professor Hugh Beale (University of Warwick)

Held in collaboration with CPLC.

3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners. The Cambridge Private Law Centre acknowledges with gratitude the generous financial support of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP and of South Square.

Professor Campbell McLachlan was the 2022-23 Arthur Goodhart Visiting Professor of Legal Science in the University of Cambridge and a visiting fellow of Trinity Hall. He is Professor of Law at Victoria University of Wellington; a member of the Institut de Droit International and of the Permanent Court of Arbitration; and an associate member of Essex Court Chambers, London.

Professor McLachlan asks what light the idea of law as a science can shed on the capacity of international law to respond to the many disintegrative pressures that it faces.

The lecture begins at 02:43

For information about the Arthur Goodhart Visiting Professorship in Legal Science see https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive/arthur-goodhart-visiting-professor-legal-science

Bio: Valentin Jeutner is an Associate Professor of Law at Lund University, Sweden. He was educated at Oxford (BA Law), Georgetown (LLM), Cambridge (PhD Law), Lund (MTh Theology). Valentin is a member of the New York Bar and has held visiting positions at the Federal Chancellery of Germany, Münster University, KU Leuven, the Berkman Klein Center of Harvard Law School, and Malta University. Since 2013, he has been affiliated with Pembroke College, Oxford. Valentin's teaching and research activities concern foundational questions of (international) law.

For more about the Cambridge Socio-Legal Group see: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/researchfaculty-centres-networks-and-groups/cambridge-socio-legal-group

In this short video Professor Alison Young explains the backdrop to the case, sets out how the Supreme court decided the case, and explores possible future paths to Scottish independence.

Alison Young is the Sir David Williams Professor of Public Law at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of Robinson College. She teaches constitutional law on undergraduate and postgraduate courses at the University of Cambridge and is the author of Turpin and Tomkins’ British Government and the Constitution (8th Edition).

For more information about Professor Young, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/al-young/77940

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

The lecture was chaired by Dr Jonathan Morgan, and Professor Ibbetson was introduced by Mr Justice Foxton.

While it will come as no surprise to learn that David will continue his research for years to come, this lecture marks his retirement from the Regius Professorship of Civil Law.

The first of these seminars took place on Wednesday 16 November and was given by Lord Carnwath, looking at the Privacy International case. Lord Carnwath gave the leading judgment of the majority in the case. Lord Carnwath and Professor Alison Young talked about the impact of the new ouster clause found in section 2 of the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022. Lord Carnwath talked about his judgment in this case and the new legislation, with a brief response from Alison Young.

The talk was sponsored by the Centre for Public Law.

This lecture was delivered at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, on 13 October 2022 as part of the series of Law and Race talks.

Supported by the Centre for Public Law: https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/

Professor Mehrdad Payandeh is Professor of International Law, European Law, and Public Law at Bucerius Law School in Hamburg, Germany. His research is focused on international human rights law, anti-discrimination law as well as general international law and constitutional law and theory. Since 2020, he is also a member of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

Law and Race talks organised by Kirsty Hughes and Vandita Khanna at the Faculty of Law on 2 November 2022.

Supported by the Centre for Public Law: https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (28 April 2022): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (11 May 2022): Career Part 1

- Third Interview (17 May 2022): Career Part 2

- Fourth Interview (7 June 2022): Scholarly Works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/cambridge-law-eminent-scholars-archive

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (28 April 2022): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (11 May 2022): Career Part 1

- Third Interview (17 May 2022): Career Part 2

- Fourth Interview (7 June 2022): Scholarly Works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/cambridge-law-eminent-scholars-archive

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (28 April 2022): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (11 May 2022): Career Part 1

- Third Interview (17 May 2022): Career Part 2

- Fourth Interview (7 June 2022): Scholarly Works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/cambridge-law-eminent-scholars-archive

**Please note due to technical problems, the audio quality of this interview is very poor**

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (28 April 2022): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (11 May 2022): Career Part 1

- Third Interview (17 May 2022): Career Part 2

- Fourth Interview (7 June 2022): Scholarly Works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/cambridge-law-eminent-scholars-archive

The Northern Ireland Protocol forms part of the Withdrawal Agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union. The Protocol creates a special legal position for Northern Ireland in the light of its particular political circumstances, effectively enabling Northern Ireland to remain within the EU’s Single Market for goods. The UK Government argues that it is necessary to ‘fix’ certain practical problems that it perceives in relation to this arrangement, including ‘disruption and diversion of trade and significant costs and bureaucracy for business’. It therefore proposes the enactment of the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill.

In this video, Professor Mark Elliott considers the extent to which the Bill could be considered to be proposing a breach of international law.

Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject.

For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos created by Daniel Bates featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Baroness Beeban Kidron OBE is a Crossbench Peer in the UK House of Lords and Chair of 5Rights Foundation. For 30 years, Baroness Kidron worked as a film director, making TV and film dramas and documentaries in the UK and Hollywood. She is best known for directing an adaption of the novel Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit and Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason.

Baroness Kidron was appointed to the House of Lords, where she takes a particular interest in all things digital. She introduced a ground-Breaking piece of data protection legislation, ‘the Age Appropriate Design Code’, which gives under 18’s a high bar of data protection.

Kidron is the Founder and Chair of 5Rights Foundation, whose mission is to build the digital world children and young people deserve. Most recently, 5Rights supported the UNCRC in drafting General Comment No. 35 on the relevance of children’s right to the digital world. This is anticipated to have global significance on the expectation and duties of States and businesses to children.

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/

The Sir David Williams Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest lecturer in honour of Sir David Williams, Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of English Law and Emeritus Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University.

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for Public Law website at:

http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/sir-david-williams-lectures

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see Twitter (https://twitter.com/Cam_ProBono) or Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/CamProBono).

- Rupert Reece (Gide Loyrette Nouel) - 'Are muti-tier dispute resolution clauses more trouble than they are worth?' (45:18)

- Ian Gaunt (London Maritime Arbitrators Association) - 'Different strokes: How is shipbuilding arbitration unlike (and sometimes like) other construction arbitration?' (01:04:07)

The Cambridge University Arbitration Society (CUArb) hosted the seventh annual Cambridge Arbitration Days on 1-2 April 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge (the ‘Cambridge Arbitration Days’ or ‘CAD’). The Cambridge Arbitration Days bring together scholars, practitioners, and students for discussions on intriguing and topical issues in the field of international arbitration.

For more information on the Cambridge Arbitration Days see: https://www.cuarb.uk/cambridge-arbitration-day/

- Dr Leanne O'Leary (Senior Lecturer in Law, Edge Hill University) - 'Switching teams mid-match: Should sports arbitration parties be allowed to change their factual position on appeal?' (27:18)

- Paul Gilroy QC (Barrister, Littleton Chambers) - 'The Russian anti-doping scandal and the recent CAS decision to reduce WADA’s sanctions: Was the CAS panel too lenient?' (43:20)

- Udo Onwere (Partner, Bray & Krais) - 'An insight into the Football Association panels' (1:05:34)

- Jeffrey Benz (Door tenant, 4 New Square) - 'Reflections of a CAS arbitrator' (1:28:19)

The Cambridge University Arbitration Society (CUArb) hosted the seventh annual Cambridge Arbitration Days on 1-2 April 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge (the ‘Cambridge Arbitration Days’ or ‘CAD’). The Cambridge Arbitration Days bring together scholars, practitioners, and students for discussions on intriguing and topical issues in the field of international arbitration.

For more information on the Cambridge Arbitration Days see: https://www.cuarb.uk/cambridge-arbitration-day/

- Belinda McRae (Twenty Essex Chambers) - 'Challenges to investment treaty awards in the English courts' (32:29)

- Alvaro Nistal (Arnold & Porter) - 'Protection of foreign investments during armed conflict' (55:52)

- Dr Lionel Nichols (CANDEY) - 'Access to justice in investor-state arbitration: Risk and reward in funding and enforcement' (1:17:26)

The Cambridge University Arbitration Society (CUArb) hosted the seventh annual Cambridge Arbitration Days on 1-2 April 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge (the ‘Cambridge Arbitration Days’ or ‘CAD’). The Cambridge Arbitration Days bring together scholars, practitioners, and students for discussions on intriguing and topical issues in the field of international arbitration.

For more information on the Cambridge Arbitration Days see: https://www.cuarb.uk/cambridge-arbitration-day/

- Renato Stephan Grion (Pinheiro Neto Advogados) - 'Halliburton v Chubb: Conflicts in arbitral appointments - Recent trends in international commercial arbitration' (24:35)

- Hamid Abdulkareem (Three Crowns) - 'Enforcement of ethical standards - Gaps in the edifice' (50:17)

The Cambridge University Arbitration Society (CUArb) hosted the seventh annual Cambridge Arbitration Days on 1-2 April 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge (the ‘Cambridge Arbitration Days’ or ‘CAD’). The Cambridge Arbitration Days bring together scholars, practitioners, and students for discussions on intriguing and topical issues in the field of international arbitration.

For more information on the Cambridge Arbitration Days see: https://www.cuarb.uk/cambridge-arbitration-day/

- Rebecca Barber, Ph.D. Candidate, University of Queensland - 'The Role of the UN General Assembly in Determining the Legitimacy of Governments' (5:46)

- Dr. Leslie-Anne Duvic-Paoli, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Law, King’s College London - 'Citizens at the Global Governance Table: The Global Citizens’ Assembly on the Climate Emergency and The Making of International Climate Law' (23:23)

- Dr. Abhishek Trivedi, Assistant Professor of Law, Institute of Legal Studies and Research, GLA University, Mathura, India - 'Global Governance of REDD+ and the Challenges of Applying the International Law of Free, Prior and Informed Consent: Moving Towards an Integrated Human Rights-based Approach' (40:37)

- Dr. David Hughes, Assistant Professor, Canadian Forces College / Dr. Yahli Shereshevsky, Senior Lecturer, University of Haifa School of Law - 'State-Academic Lawmaking as Global Governance' (1:01:31)

- Dr. Agnieszka Szpak, Associate Professor, Nicolaus Copernicus University - 'Global Governance, International Law, and Cities' (1:19:03)

- Discussion and Q&A (1:33:50)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

- Dr. Sophie Duroy, Fellow, KFG Berlin-Potsdam Research Group The International Rule of Law: Rise or Decline?' - 'The Case for a Human Rights Approach to Global Security' (7:45)

- Dr. Maxwell Young Joo, Associate Professor, Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University - 'The Passion of Global Governance as a Threat to International Law: The Irreversible Precedent of Libya and UNSC Resolution 1973 Legitimizing Illegality under Humanitarianism and Democratic Intervention' (22:50)

- Dr. Isabel Lischewski, Scientific Associate, Faculty of Law, WWU Münster 'Designing Oversight, Overlooking Human Rights? How State Interest Shapes Procedure in Platform Governance' (39:11)

- Md Khalid Rahman, Assistant Professor of Law, American International University-Bangladesh - 'A Study on the Persecution of Rohingya Considering Incitement to Genocide on Global Standards: An Empirical Approach' (57:00)

- Discussion and Q&A (1:13:32)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

Chair Remarks: Dr. Markus Gehring, University of Cambridge (0:59)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

- Nina Herzog, Ph.D. Candidate, University of Leeds - '‘Positive complementarity’ – a threat to ne bis in idem in International Criminal Law?' (2:37)

- Pushkar Keshavmurthy, Case Manager, Mumbai Center for International Arbitration / Daniela-Olivia Ghicajanu, LL.M. Candidate, Georgetown University Law Center - 'Security for Costs in ISDS: Is the UNCITRAL Working Group III Leading to the Predictable Global Governance of International Adjudication?' (17:15)

- Dr. Agata Kleczkowska, Assistant Professor, Institute of Law Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences - 'Enforcing International Law Through Sanctions: From Comprehensive to Horizontal Sanctions. Is International Law Heading in the Right Direction?' (31:54)

- Xiao Mao, D.Phil Candidate, University of Oxford; Judicial Fellow, International Court of Justice - 'Promoting Global Governance through Granting Effective Remedies: Comparison of Recent Remedy Cases in the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court' (51:26)

- Sarthak Roy, Human Rights Specialist, Richemont International SA - 'Commissions of Inquiry as Bulwarks Against Impunity' (1:07:06)

- Discussion and Q&A (1:20:34)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

- Santosh Anand, Assistant Professor of Law, Alliance University, Bangalore, India - 'Modified Continuity: International Criminal Law and the Vision of ‘Ecocide’' (7:44)

- Dr. Carlos Soria–Rodriguez, Marie Skłodowska-Curie Postdoctoral Research Fellow, University of Jaén - 'Marine Renewable Energy Technologies in the High Seas: Challenges and Opportunities to Strengthen International Environmental and Renewable Energy Governance' (22:12)

- Thiago Pires Oliveira, Ph.D. Candidate, University of São Paulo / Dr. Tagore Trajano de Almeida Silva, Professor, Catholic University of Salvador - 'The Proposals for Regulation of Methane Emissions as Turning Point of Global Climate Governance: A Socio-legal Approach' (38:46)

- Danilo B. Garrido Alves, Ph.D. Candidate, University of Oxford - 'The Analogy between Corporations and International Organizations: towards a new, UNGP-based approach to studying global governance' (54:02)

- Ju-Ching Huang, S.J.D. Candidate, Georgetown University Law Center - 'Framing the Future Global Adaptation Law Regime: Principles for the Emerging Dynamics of Climate Change Governance' (1:09:00)

- Discussion and Q&A (1:27:30)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

- Dr. Thanapat Chatinakrob, Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Thammasat University, Thailand - 'Rethinking the Scope of International Law Regulating Information Operations: Lesson Learned From a Crime of Online Genocide in Myanmar' (7:00)

- Yuan Fang: J.S.D Candidate, Washington University in St. Louis, School of Law - 'The Global Governance of Cyberspace Within the UN Charter Context: Main Issues, Methodology, and the Pathway Forward' (23:45)

- Dr. Asaf Lubin, Associate Professor of Law, Indiana University Maurer School of Law - 'The Law and Politics of Ransomware' (38:15)

- Dr. María Vásquez Callo-Müller, Post-Doctoral Researcher, University of Lucerne / Dr. Iryna Bogdanova, Research Fellow, World Trade Institute - 'Unilateral Cyber Sanctions and Global Cybersecurity Governance' (56:45)

- Dr. Giovanni De Gregorio, Postdoctoral Researcher, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford / Dr. Roxana Radu, Lecturer, Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford - 'Back and Forth in Global Internet Governance: Public and Private Authority Examined' (1:12:50)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

- Emmanuel Saffa Abdulai, Founder and Executive Director, Society for Democratic Initiatives - 'The Emerging Trend in International Law and Global Governance: the African Experience' (5:00)

- Medy Dervovic, Research Assistant, Stefansson Arctic Institute / Katharina Heinrich, Junior Researcher, Arctic Centre, University of Lapland - 'Law-Science Nexus in International Law-Making: Perspectives from Arctic Fisheries Governance' (34:08)

- Tsubasa Shinohara, Ph.D. Candidate, University of Lausanne - 'Global Governance in International Esports Society?' (50:51)

- Marissa Sterling, J.D. Candidate, Georgetown University Law Center - 'Course-Correcting for Unexpected Flow: A Discussion of Trade in Virtual Water and the Global Water Governance Regime' (1:09:00)

- Discussion and Q&A (1:18:40)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

- Dr. Alexandra Harrington, Lecturer in Law, Lancaster University Law School - 'Global Governance and International Law Synergies in the Face of Emergency' (2:53)

- Ilias Ioannou, Ph.D. Candidate, Queen Mary University of London - 'Relational Networks in International Trade Platforms’ (24:00)

- Hedvig Lärka, Ph.D. Candidate, University of Gothenburg - 'Capital Flight as Creature of Sovereignty: A Posthumanist Approach to Corporate Income Taxation and the ‘Global Tax Base’ of Pillar II?' (41:12)

- Discussion and Q&A (59:58)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

- Joel Slawotsky, Faculty, Reichman University - 'Corporate Monitoring of the State to Ensure Compliance with International Law' (8:06)

- Keer Huang, Ph.D. Candidate, Wuhan University Institute of Law - 'Development and Challenges of Global Subsidy Governance: An International Investment Law Perspective' (30:12)

- Discussion and Q&A (44:40)

- Further remarks from the Chair: Professor Lorand Bartels, Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge (1:09:41)

- Keynote Address: Professor Ernst Ulrich Petersmann, chaired by Professor Lorand Bartels (1:17:10)

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

Chaired by Professor Catherine Barnard.

0:38 - Mr Darren Peterson and Mr Oliver Hailes

6:54 - Professor Catherine Barnard

9:03 - Dr P S Rao

22:22 - Q&A

This is a recording from the events of the 11th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference

Cambridge International Law Journal, held under the title 'Strengthening Global Governance through International Law: Challenges and Opportunities' on 26 & 27 March 2022 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:

http://cilj.co.uk/

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (16 November 2021): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (23 November 2021): LSE, ICJ and Master of Magdalene

- Third Interview (1 February 2022): Scholarly works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/cambridge-law-eminent-scholars-archive

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (16 November 2021): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (23 November 2021): LSE, ICJ and Master of Magdalene

- Third Interview (1 February 2022): Scholarly works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/cambridge-law-eminent-scholars-archive

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (16 November 2021): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (23 November 2021): LSE, ICJ and Master of Magdalene

- Third Interview (1 February 2022): Scholarly works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/cambridge-law-eminent-scholars-archive

In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question.

Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe.

This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/

For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Prophylactic Rights examines the emergence of the sex work labour subjectivity at the intersection of two state surveillance regimes: HIV/AIDS and anti-trafficking. It draws on ethnographic work since 2011 with Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Committee (Durbar), a grassroots female sex workers' collective in Sonagachi. In 1992 the All India Institute of Hygiene and Public Health identified sex workers as a High-Risk Group and launched the Sexually Transmitted Diseases/HIV Intervention Project (SHIP) in Sonagachi. SHIP recruited sex workers as peer-educators to introduce others to the etiology of HIV/AIDS and promote the condom as the prophylactic device. In addressing structural barriers –poverty and stigma –SHIP achieved remarkable success in reducing new HIV infections through the sustained use of condoms. More importantly, SHIP extended the prophylactic narrative beyond public health to emphasize the threat the virus posed to the labour and livelihood of the women. The rearticulation of HIV/AIDS as a question of the labouring body that is worthy of rights, was unprecedented in Sonagachi. It motivated the peer educators to establish Durbar in 1995 as a collective to demand sex work rights and juridically delink it from trafficking. The existing literature posits both sex work and sex workers as a priori categories, when the categories themselves are relatively new in Sonagachi. This project examines how the labor narrative emerges in dissociation from ‘prostitution’ and how ‘prostitutes’ come to inhabit the worker position. I argue that for labor to emerge as a political category, the women submitted to HIV/AIDS and anti-trafficking surveillances, while also subverting them with resistive connotations. In formulating what I term, the ‘medicolegal unstable’, I further show that the struggle for labor rights in such instances of historical marginalization, is characteristically uneven, that is, advances in HIV/AIDS prevention and related health rights of sex workers are often undermined by regressive anti-trafficking laws.

Given the ways in which regenerative medicine blurs socially-significant boundaries, the ethical and legal obligations of clinicians, researchers, funders, and governments are fluid and uncertain. For example, it is unclear whether present policies governing the use of regenerative technologies offer sufficient safeguards, even if access is limited to patients with conditions deemed sufficiently serious to justify the risks.

This talk explores whether international human rights law might require governments to identify, monitor, and support translational pathways that would provide broad, equitable access to the benefits of regenerative medicine, or whether international human rights law requires a more controlled approach because of the potential social implications. With regenerative medicine's great potential, the welfare of current and future generations is at stake. We must collectively ask ourselves how best to secure a desirable clinical future for present day and future generations.

About the Speaker:

Bartha Maria Knoppers is Full Professor, Canada Research Chair in Law and Medicine, and Director of the Centre of Genomics and Policy at McGill University.

Baron Cornelius Ver Heyden de Lancey (1889-1984) was a wealthy and public-spirited Dutchman who at different times in his life was a dentist, doctor, surgeon, barrister and art historian. In 1970 he created the De Lancey and De La Hanty Foundation, to promote studies in medico-legal topics. The Foundation generously gave Cambridge the Ver Heyden de Lancey Fund, which since 1996 has funded occasional public lectures on medico-legal issues of current interest.

For more information about the Baron Ver Heyden de Lancey Lecture series, please see http://www.lml.law.cam.ac.uk/events/vhdl-events

The 2022 Mackenzie-Stuart Lecture was delivered by Professor Stephen Weatherill (Emeritus Jacques Delors Professor of European Law, Oxford University) under the title 'Saving Football from Itself: Why and How to Re-make EU Sports Law' on 3 March 2022.

Abstract: EU law's application to sport is ad hoc, ex post facto and driven by competition law (and occasionally free movement law). Something more systematic would be helpful - not least because governance in sport needs reform to prevent corruption, intransparency, unaccountable power etc. The latest example/flashpoint being the European SuperLeague. This talk aims to explore these issues further.

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for European Legal Studies website at:

https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/mackenzie-stuart-lectures

Professor Spencer is Professor Emeritus of Law and Honorary President of the European Criminal Law Association. He has written extensively on criminal justice matters and has been involved in a number of law reform projects.

For more information about Professor Spencer, please refer to his profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/jr-spencer/79

Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

The Honourable Mrs Justice Falk DBE spoke about modern judging, her experience as a High Court judge having followed an unconventional path to the High Court bench, the selection of judges, and some lessons learned from the pandemic for the conduct of proceedings.

Dame Sarah Falk studied law at the University of Cambridge before starting her professional career at Freshfields. She was a partner at Freshfields between 1994 and 2013 and subsequently worked as a consultant. While at Freshfields she was involved in graduate recruitment as well as holding managerial roles. She became a High Court judge in October 2018, sitting in the Chancery Division, and was appointed to the Judicial Appointments Commission as the High Court representative in October 2019.

The Cambridge Freshfields Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest of the Cambridge Private Law Centre, and the event is sponsored by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.

More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Private Law Centre website:

http://www.privatelaw.law.cam.ac.uk/events/past-events

Over the course of its military involvement in the Syrian conflict, the UK Government has claimed that since 2014, some 1,700 British air strikes have only caused 1 known civilian death. Just last week, it was revealed that British forces are linked to the deaths of 86 children and more than 200 adult civilians during the Afghanistan conflict.

The use of airborne explosive weapons by the United Kingdom in recent armed conflicts has created a risk that civilians might be the victims or unintended targets of the UK’s air strikes. By virtue of their operational characteristics and largely indiscriminate area-effects once detonated, airborne explosive weapons have been documented to have a greater potential to cause civilian death and injury than other conventional weapons.

In a report written by Cambridge Pro Bono Project researchers for the London-based NGO Action on Armed Violence, the UK’s obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law as well as domestic public law to investigate, record and report civilian casualties have been examined.

For its first CPP Speaker Series event of this academic year, the CPP in cooperation with Iain Overton, Executive Director of Action on Armed Violence, will discuss the findings of this report together with experts Georgia Edwards, UK Advocacy Officer and Conflict Researcher at Airwars, and Gavin Crowden, Executive Director at Every Casualty Counts.

For more information see: https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/

The 2021 Baron Ver Heyden de Lancey Lecture on Medico-Legal Studies was delivered by Dr Silvia Camporesi of King's College London on 20 March 2021, and was entitled "Law, Hormones, and Sport: a level playing field?".

For more information about the Baron Ver Heyden de Lancey Lecture series, please see http://www.lml.law.cam.ac.uk/events/vhdl-events

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (20 November 2020): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (15 January 2021): University Career and Retirement

- Third Interview (26 February 2021): Scholarly works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (20 November 2020): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (15 January 2021): University Career and Retirement

- Third Interview (26 February 2021): Scholarly works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive

The interviews were recorded, and the audio version is available on this website with transcripts of those recordings:

- First Interview (20 November 2020): Early Life and Career

- Second Interview (15 January 2021): University Career and Retirement

- Third Interview (26 February 2021): Scholarly works

For more information, see the Squire website at https://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk

Caoilfhionn has acted in many of the leading human rights cases in the UK in recent years, including acting for bereaved families and survivors of the 7/7 London bombings and the Hillsborough disaster.

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk

So, what does the future hold for the parole system? What are the problems faced by the current system and what are the solutions?

The Parole Board, together with the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice and the Institute of Criminology of the University of Cambridge, invite you to join them for two webinars on the topic.

There were two webinars: 2 hours each, 8-9 December 2020, 5–7pm.

The second seminar, on Wed 9th December, focused more on appropriate reforms.

Chair: Professor Loraine Gelsthorpe, Director of the Institute of Criminology

• A Parole Board for tomorrow: how further reform could improve the parole system: Faith Geary, Chief Operating Officer, Parole Board. Respondent: Simon Creighton, Bhatt Murphy, solicitors
• The relative importance of ‘transparency’, ‘independence’, ‘accountability’ and ‘public confidence’ Professor David Feldman. Respondent: Martin Jones, CEO, Parole Board
• Understanding the place of parole within and without a root and branch review of sentencing and of the penal system: Professor Rob Canton. Respondent: Professor Nick Hardwick

Conclusions: Dr Harry Annison

Further details: The Government has now published more details of its long-awaited “root and branch” review of the parole system. The Consultation “on making some parole hearings open to victims of crime and the wider public” acknowledged that “the question of whether to allow public hearings is only one aspect of the root and branch review which will look at four broad areas: i) an evaluation of the parole reforms to date, ii) the constitution and status of the Parole Board, iii) improving public understanding and confidence in the parole system, and iv) measures to improve openness and transparency” (para 12).

For more details see the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice website: https://www.cccj.law.cam.ac.uk/

So, what does the future hold for the parole system? What are the problems faced by the current system and what are the solutions?

The Parole Board, together with the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice and the Institute of Criminology of the University of Cambridge, invite you to join them for two webinars on the topic.

There were two webinars: 2 hours each, 8-9 December 2020, 5–7pm.

The first webinar, on Tuesday 8th December, focused on critiques of the current system, identifying ‘problems’.

Chair: The Chairman of the Parole Board

• The context of the Government’s root and branch review: Professor Nicky Padfield. Respondent: HH Peter Rook QC, Deputy Chair of Parole Board
• What measures actually increase public safety? Measuring ‘effectiveness’: Dr Jo Bailey, HMPPS Head of Psychology. Respondent: Professor Fergus McNeill
• Increasing public understanding of parole: Professor Julian Roberts. Respondent: Angela Cossins, Deputy Director, National Probation Service.

Conclusions: Tom Hawker-Dawson

Further details: The Government has now published more details of its long-awaited “root and branch” review of the parole system. The Consultation “on making some parole hearings open to victims of crime and the wider public” acknowledged that “the question of whether to allow public hearings is only one aspect of the root and branch review which will look at four broad areas: i) an evaluation of the parole reforms to date, ii) the constitution and status of the Parole Board, iii) improving public understanding and confidence in the parole system, and iv) measures to improve openness and transparency” (para 12).

For more details see the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice website: https://www.cccj.law.cam.ac.uk/

The Death Penalty Project is an international legal action charity based at Simons Muirhead & Burton LLP. It aims to use the law to protect prisoners facing execution and achieve fairer and more human justice systems around the world. Saul Lehrfreund MBE has dedicated his career to representing prisoners facing the death penalty in criminal and constitutional proceedings around the world and before human rights courts and other international bodies. He has also participated in expert delegations to Japan, China, Taiwan and India focusing on criminal justice reforms and the potential for restriction and abolition of the death penalty. Saul Lehrfreund MBE is a leading authority on capital punishment and international human rights law and has published and lectured extensively on these topics.

The video featured in the presentation is available at https://deathpenaltyproject.org/knowledge/failed-justice-innocent-on-death-row/

For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk