In China, algorithms have been increasingly used in many different sectors to facilitate analysis of massive data and optimise the decision-making process. While this approach brings significant benefits, the complex design of algorithmic models and the large scale of data involved pose serious challenges to the existing regulations. In response, China has gradually established a regulatory regime covering many areas of law, such as rules governing personal information protection and algorithm recommendation services, to oversee the development and use of algorithmic decision-making. However, China’s regulatory regime is not without its limitations. Drawing on the regulatory experience of overseas jurisdictions, including the EU, the US, the UK and Singapore, this paper makes some suggestions for improving Chinese regulations. It is worth considering formulating specific requirements for data used in algorithmic decision-making and complementing the existing regulatory regime with algorithmic audit mechanisms. China is also advised to strengthen private and public enforcement and incorporate the code of ethics into the governance structure of algorithmic decision-making.

A Singapore District Court recently considered certain key provisions of the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act, before acquitting a local trading company charged with importing approximately 30,000 rosewood logs into Singapore. This article examines the decision, and argues for a purposive construction of these provisions that furthers Singapore's implementation of its obligations as a Party to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species ofWild Fauna and Flora. This is particularly pertinent considering Singapore's role as a significant transhipment hub for endangered species in combatting the illegal wildlife trade. The article also argues for greater international cooperation and coordination between CITES Parties in the design and implementation_x000D_ of their respective national legal frameworks.

The public interest is a common, but rarely discussed, feature in insolvency processes. It features in both winding up and judicial management in Singapore, with statutory provisions that stipulate the public interest as a ground for invoking these processes. However, it is unclear from the legislative deliberations what specific purpose was envisaged by the public interest exception to the typical requirements for making a judicial management order. This article reviews the concept of the public interest in the context of insolvency law in general, and corporate rescue in particular. In the light of the objectives and principles of insolvency law, and the role of the public interest, it argues for a revised, more robust understanding of the public interest in judicial management and its interaction with receivership.

This report highlights the salient features of the new Securities and Exchange Act which is considered a significant development of the law relating to the Thai capital market. Among the features highlighted are the powers of the Securities and Exchange Supervision Commission, public offering, mutual fund, private fund management and criminal liabilities for the offences committed under the Act.

The Rules of Court, which came into effect in May 1996, combine the rules of the Supreme Court and the subordinate courts for the very first time. This article considers how this re-constitution was achieved, the consequences of this development, and the substantive changes which have been introduced in the context of the ongoing process of reform.

An ancient rule of the conflict of laws holds that a court will not enforce the revenue law of a foreign country. It is capable of producing peculiar results, especially when it is recalled that there is no equivalent bar to the recognition of a foreign revenue law and the line which separates the two techniques is far from bright. Moreover, it produces manifestly unsatisfactory results when a fraudster, looter, or smuggler deploys it as a meretricious shield against an investigation of the illegality of his conduct. This paper attempts to ask where existing law might have gone wrong, and whether it might yield to a spot of gentle reinterpretation, by drawing on the broader doctrines of the common law conflict of laws in the hope of producing more rational results.