The Global Faculty Forum in 2023 will feature Professor Bui Ngon Son, University of Oxford and Professor Ying Khai Liew, University of Melbourne.
We look forward to your participation at the following sessions to be held in January:
11 January, Wed (11:00AM-12:00PM)
Speaker: Bui Ngoc Son (Professor of Asian Laws, University of Oxford)
Moderator: Yip Man (SMU)
Topic: "The Study of Asian Laws in the Twenty-First Century: A Pluralist Approach"
Synopsis
This seminar explores and analyses the necessity for a pluralist approach to the institutional development in international scholarship on Asian laws in the 21st century. In the last two decades, the study of Asian Laws has been significantly institutionalized, evidenced by the proliferation of numerous Asian law centres, journals, associations, and education programs in different parts of the world. The institutional development in the study of Asian laws is shaped by economic dynamics in Asia, the dynamics of law reform in the region, and the expansion of comparative law. A pluralist approach is necessary for future institutional development in the study of Asian laws. First, the pluralist approach requires the exploration of laws of different sub-regions in Asia, laws of both big and small jurisdictions, and laws of both developed and developing countries in the region. Second, the approach entails the study of both contemporary legal issues and underlying legal issues, such as Asian legal philosophy and Asian legal history. Third, the approach requires a variety of methodologies in the studies in Asian laws, including doctrinal, theoretical, historical, anthropological, sociological, and comparative.
18 January, Wed (12:00PM-1:00PM)
Speaker: Ying Khai Liew (Professor & Associate Director (Private Law), Asian Law Centre, Melbourne Law School)
Moderator: Nicholas Liu (SMU)
Topic: "Remedies for Proprietary Estoppel in the UK Supreme Court: Guest v Guest"
Synopsis
There has been an important and ongoing debate in England and other Commonwealth jurisdictions as to the appropriate remedial approach in proprietary estoppel cases. The UK Supreme Court recently considered this debate for the first time in Guest v Guest [2022] UKSC 27, [2022] 3 WLR 911. By way of a bare majority, the Court held that proprietary estoppel aimed ‘to prevent the unconscionable repudiation of promises or assurances about property’, and that therefore, ‘the normal and natural remedy [is] to hold the promisor to his promise, because that [is] the simplest way to prevent the unconscionability inherent in repudiating it’. This stands in contrast to the minority’s view that proprietary estoppel remedies aim to prevent detriment.
This seminar will unpack the majority’s judgment to demonstrate that it signifies a setback in the due development of the law, and that for analytical and practical reasons it ought to be comprehensively rejected in favour of the minority’s view. Given the currency of the debate in other Commonwealth jurisdictions, it will also briefly observe how the apex courts in Singapore and Australia have approached the matter, drawing lessons from them.
