Taking its departure from the Court of Appeal decision in Republic of the Philippines v Maler Foundation, this article argues that the authorities support a self-supporting rule for accepting or rejecting a foreign confiscatory law. This rule, not unlike the rule against direct or indirect enforcement of a foreign penal, revenue or other public law, is based on considerations of territorial sovereignty and is not a choice of law rule that selects the lex situs as governing law. The implications of a rule based on considerations of sovereignty and in particular the contrast with an analysis based on the lex situs rule are elaborated.

During the nineteenth century, liabilities at common law came to be seen as principally divided into those based on contract, which needed consideration, and those based on tortious wrongdoing. Certain instances of liability that had been developed in equity and which were based on what we would now term as "detrimental reliance" did not then meet with acceptance and vanished from the legal scene. Some survived however, and this lecture deals with two of them, which have come to be known as promissory estoppel and proprietary estoppel. The extent of liability under the former, and the remedies under the latter, need reconsideration, and this lecture does this through a discussion of some of the cases in the area, new and old.

This is the second of three articles on aspects of the 1982 Convention On The Law Of The Sea. In this article, the author discusses the provisions of the convention relating to the territorial sea, contiguous zone, straits and archipelagos and the special regimes of passage for ships and aircraft through, over and under straits used for international navigation and archipelagic sea lanes. The author also discusses the negotiating process leading to the adoption of these provisions.

Over the last decade, FinTech—broadly defined as the use of new technologies to compete in the marketplace of financial institutions and intermediaries—has disrupted the financial services sector. Here, we revisit the question of how banks and regulators can best respond to this disruption. We argue that incumbent financial service providers can learn useful lessons from the experience of the most innovative companies in the world and their efforts to navigate the new realities of doing business in a networked age._x000D_ One of the striking features of successful large businesses with an established track record for sustained high performance has been their capacity to reinvent themselves as what we characterise as innovation 'ecosystems'.Akey element of an 'ecosystem' style organisation has been the implementation of effective corporate venturing strategies that feed dynamic, technology-driven innovation (what has been termed borrowing “the Start-Up Genie's Magic")._x000D_
Here, we identify seven corporate venturing strategies adopted by the most innovative companies in the world and argue that incumbent banks and other financial service providers could utilise similar strategies in responding to FinTech.Acrucial element of these strategies is a recognition of the value of co-creation, namely an inclusive, collaborative partnering between incumbents and non-traditional market players. To implement this objective effectively, incumbents need to absorb the energy, skills, and resources of the most dynamic start-ups. We argue that some banks are already moving in this_x000D_ direction and that this trend towards the 'unbundling' of incumbents is likely to continue._x000D_
We conclude with a brief discussion of the implications of such an account for regulators and regulatory design, more generally. In order to establish an environment for successful and sustainable 'ecosystems', regulators need to become active participants in these more open forms of business organisation.We characterise this regulatory approach as 'community-driven' regulatory design and identify some key issues with such a regulatory strategy.

The purpose of the Torrens system is to facilitate transactions in land. It does so by creating a conclusive land-register, which can be absolutely relied on to provide accurate title information. It therefore follows that claims asserting an unregistered right in registered land must fail, except when a person is precluded from claiming that he has relied on the information recorded on the land-register. Such preclusion occurs when a registered proprietor did not furnish consideration, or took with the knowledge that his predecessor in title did not genuinely consent to transfer to him, or voluntarily undertakes obligations. The mechanics of the Torrens system of centralised land transactions mean that any right concerning land ought to be capable of protection by caveat.

Intellectual property rights in Singapore are governed by separate statutes as well as the common law. While there are instances where cumulative protection under more than one intellectual property regime is either expressly acknowledged or restricted, there are other situations which are not so dealt with. This article examines one such situation, viz, how it may be possible to acquire both copyright as well as trade marks protection, and the consequences of such cumulative protection.