The joint-ownership structure of multi-storey buildings in Hong Kong SAR has long held back maintenance decisions for public safety due to a procedural deadlock. A deadlock results from dispersed ownership votes and is thus a typical collective action problem. This paper holds that, in specific cases where public safety is at risk, the right of repair is to be exercised by the Owners' Corporation (OC). At the same time, the procedural voting rights of individual owners should be reduced from the protection granted by property laws to that provided under liability laws, and thus the OC has a higher priority right to act based on expert assessments. Drawing on the dichotomy of property rules and liability rules by Calabresi and Melamed, this paper first sets out the reasons for such a shift in light of public safety. The article then applies the principle of proportionality to set out a four-part test for manifest risk and places strict limitations on the exercise of the priority right by the OC. Finally, the paper proposes a tiered system of ex post judicial remedies and, most notably, introduces an owner's statutory derivative action modeled on the Companies Ordinance. This offers the minority shareholders who have lost their ex-ante veto effective channels for accountability. This adjustment of rights aims to overcome the problem of fragmented voting, improve the efficiency of building safety governance, and at the same time ensure the bottom line of private property rights protection.

Show more

Artificial intelligence technology is accelerating the adoption of highly autonomous vehicles, but determining liability in traffic accidents presents challenges stemming from legislative, judicial, and technical factors. China's current laws are based on traditional driving practices and lack specific regulations to address the unique characteristics of autonomous driving. Traditional liability rules are insufficiently suited to this technology. In judicial practice, there is confusion regarding who should bear responsibility and what principles should apply, leading to inconsistent rulings in similar cases. Additionally, the opaque nature of algorithms and the system's ability to learn autonomously make it difficult to determine fault, establish causal relationships, and allocate responsibility. This paper uses the Sun Modi case as a starting point to analyze these legal barriers. Drawing on experiences from Germany, Japan, the United States, and the United Kingdom, which have implemented hierarchical regulations, insurance coverage, and data recording systems, the paper proposes establishing liability rules based on the level of automation, improving the framework for determining responsibility and attributing fault, and creating mandatory insurance and compensation funds. It also suggests adopting multiple legislative approaches to ensure that laws remain adaptable, thereby balancing technological innovation with the protection of victims' rights. This approach can help promote the safe and orderly development of autonomous driving while providing a legal foundation for such progress.

Show more

As Prepaid consumption is now very common. Merchants prefer to promote, and consumers also buy in - after all, discounts are available. At first glance, neither side is losing.But the problem lies in the "pay first, enjoy later" model. After you have paid the money, whether you can smoothly consume and when to consume depends entirely on the reliability of the merchant. Unfortunately, the law has not kept up and the provisions to protect consumers are insufficient. Some merchants set traps in contracts, using standard terms to restrict card refunds and transfers, and consumers are often powerless in case of disputes. As for the regulatory authorities, they each have their own responsibilities and cannot form a joint force.So, to truly protect consumers' wallets, we need to do a few practical things. Firstly, the system of performance bond must be established uniformly. Secondly, the regulatory mechanism needs to be unified. Furthermore, before the merchant collects payment, the information must be clearly stated and cannot be concealed.Ultimately, the supervision mechanism needs to be strong, and credit evaluation needs to keep up. Only in this way can the pain points of prepaid consumption be gradually resolved, and the market can also move steadily and far.

Show more

Gender-based violence (GBV) within LGBTQ+ communities raises challenges for protection order (PO) systems that were largely developed around heterosexual intimate partner violence (IPV) and physical harm. This paper compares the PO systems of California in the United States and the United Kingdom (UK) through a qualitative socio-legal approach. It examines how evidentiary standards, institutional bias, and narrow understandings of abuse affect LGBTQ+ victims’ access to protection. The analysis shows that identity-based abuse, coercive control, psychological violence, and threats of forced outing are often difficult to prove under conventional legal categories. California’s model formally permits LGBTQ+ applicants to seek relief, but it places heavy burdens on individuals through private filings, judicial discretion, and uneven enforcement. The UK system adopts broader definitions of domestic abuse and stronger multi-agency coordination, although bureaucratic complexity remains a limitation. The paper argues that effective reform requires expanded legal definitions of abuse, improved institutional awareness of LGBTQ+ IPV, and closer coordination between courts, police, social services, and community support organizations.

Show more