“Big Data”, one of the hot topics in recent years, has been widely discussed. The impact of “Big Data” on competition interests both practitioners and scholars. The major concern from antitrust perspective is whether “Big Data” could facilitate monopoly, especially in the platform economy where data could be easily accessed or collected by platforms from multiple sides of the market. The purpose of this article is to review the role of data in different stages of platform development and analyze the possibility of monopoly based on the interplay between data and platforms. We will also discuss when and how authorities should intervene with the anti-competitive behaviors in the platform economy driven by “Big Data” in different scenarios.
Continue Reading Could“Big Data”Facilitate Monopoly and How Shall We Step In?
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in the PRC
By Teng Haidi and Yu Qing King & Wood Mallesons’ Dispute Resolution group
With the Belt and Road initiative likely to drive significant outbound investment by Chinese companies, the ability to enforce foreign arbitral awards in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) will be a key issue for these companies and their Belt and Road counterparties.
Continue Reading Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in the PRC
The Singapore International Commercial Court – Two years on
By Rebecca LeBherz and Zoe Walker. King & Wood Mallesons’ Brisbane office.
It has now been two years since the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) was established as an alternative forum to resolve international commercial disputes in Singapore. There are three institutions in Singapore capable of resolving international commercial disputes – it is a veritable cocktail of dispute resolutions services.
London may still dominate cross-border commercial litigation, but it is no longer the default. The SICC has proven that it is able to quickly resolve complex disputes of substantial value. Rebecca LeBherz and Zoe Walker examine where the SICC is now, and what it achieved in its first two years.
Continue Reading The Singapore International Commercial Court – Two years on
A B&R Conversation with Dr Wang Wenying and Sarah Grimmer
By Paul Starr and James McKenzie King & Wood Mallesons’ Hong Kong office.
Paul Starr, Practice Leader Hong Kong Dispute Resolution and Infrastructure and James McKenzie, Senior Associate, King & Wood Mallesons, Hong Kong in conversation with Dr Wang Wenying, Secretary General at China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission Hong Kong (CIETAC HK) and Sarah Grimmer, Secretary General at Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC).
Continue Reading A B&R Conversation with Dr Wang Wenying and Sarah Grimmer
New Automated Vehicle Trial Guidelines
By Alex Maschmedt and Matthew Gardner. King & Wood Mallesons’ Melbourne office.
Two of the key policy bodies for road and vehicle use in Australia, AustRoads and the National Transport Commission (NTC), have jointly developed new “Guidelines for Trials of Automated Vehicles in Australia” (Guidelines), published on 24 May 2017.
The Guidelines are the first step in framework for reform of Australia’s transport regulatory systems to accommodate the rise of automated vehicles.
Continue Reading New Automated Vehicle Trial Guidelines
KWM continues success at the FT Asia-Pacific Innovative Lawyers Awards
By King & Wood Mallesons
King & Wood Mallesons (KWM) was recognised with two awards at the 2017 Financial Times Asia-Pacific Innovative Lawyers Awards in Hong Kong last Thursday, including the prestigious ‘Innovation in Legal Expertise’ and ‘Innovation in the Business of Law’ categories.
KWM’s role on the World Bank’s first Special Drawing Rights (SDR) – denominated bond in the Chinese Inter-Bank Bond Market saw the firm win the Innovation in Legal Expertise category, against significant competition from leading global and regional law firms.
Continue Reading KWM continues success at the FT Asia-Pacific Innovative Lawyers Awards
How to Draw a Line Between Employers’ Management and Employees’ Privacy Rights?
By Linda Liang and Li Ruowei King & Wood Mallesons’ Commercial & Regulatory group
Enterprises’ management over employees is by no means limitless, but is, to varying degrees in different circumstances, restricted by employees’ individual rights. For example, the law provides that an employer can ask an employee for information directly related to the employment contract, but if an employer requests information beyond this category, such as personal medical records or parent information, it may be considered a violation of the employee’s privacy. However, although privacy is a statutory right of citizens, its scope and content always vary with the changes of a person’s social roles. For instance, the scope of an individual’s privacy towards his or her family is narrower than that towards strangers. So, based on the personal dependency characteristics of employment relationships, to what degree should employees’ privacy rights be subject to employers’ management?
Continue Reading How to Draw a Line Between Employers’ Management and Employees’ Privacy Rights?
Who will lead Smart Cities — SMEs, MNCs or Governments?
By Peter Bullock, Neil Carabine, Urszula McCormack and Donovan Ferguson. King & Wood Mallesons’ Hong Kong office.
We gathered senior legal, IT and infrastructure professionals representing transport, TMT, energy and consulting businesses for a roundtable discussion in Hong Kong (on an unattributable basis) around the opportunities for, and blockers to, Smart City development. We found reasons for optimism that Smart City technology would win through, along with frustration at the pace of progress.
Continue Reading Who will lead Smart Cities — SMEs, MNCs or Governments?
Summary of Beijing’s Answers to Questions About the Application of Law in Adjudication of Employment Disputes (Part Three)
This article was written by King & Wood Mallesons’ Labor law group.
We have split the explanation of Beijing’s Answers to Questions Concerning the Application of Law in Adjudication of Employment Disputes (the “Answers”) published on the 24th of April 2017 into three parts, so that the main provisions can be easily understood. This is the third in our series and starts from point 8 of the Answers.
Continue Reading Summary of Beijing’s Answers to Questions About the Application of Law in Adjudication of Employment Disputes (Part Three)
Summary of Beijing Authorities’ Answers to Questions of Law Application in the Handling of Employment Disputes (Part Two)
This article was written by King & Wood Mallesons’ Labor law group.
We split the explanation of Beijing authorities’ Answers to Questions of Law Application in the Handling of Employment Disputes published on 24 April 2017 into three parts, in order that the Answers’ main provisions can be easily understood. This is the second part of our explanation.
The circumstances constituting “major changes in objective circumstances”
The Answers provides that“a major change in objective circumstances” means a change after the conclusion of an employment contract that could not be foreseen at the conclusion of the contract, and renders the employment contract or its main articles unenforceable, or makes continued performance result in unfair situations such as excessive cost, which will then in turn make the purpose of the contract difficult to be achieved.
Continue Reading Summary of Beijing Authorities’ Answers to Questions of Law Application in the Handling of Employment Disputes (Part Two)