SMU Yong Pung How School of Law

congratulates Chang Wen Yee and Joel Soon (both LLB'22) for graduating from their Harvard LLM as winners of the Addison Brown Prize and Roger Fisher and Frank Sander Prize respectively. The former is awarded for the best essay written by a student on a subject related to private international law or maritime law, while the latter is awarded to the best student paper on dispute resolution or ADR.

Wen Yee credits her time at SMU: "This achievement would not have been possible without the support I received at SMU. I benefitted tremendously from the faculty’s generosity, be it sharing opportunities to collaborate on academic pieces or assist with research projects, or taking the time to mentor those participating in moot court. I hope students at SMU will continue to dream big, seize opportunities that come their way, and pay it forward by mentoring future generations."

Joel adds: "I am also grateful to SMU for the exceptional legal education and opportunities it has provided me. I owe special thanks to my professors and moot teammates, whose mentorship and support have shaped my approach to legal writing. I hope future generations of SMU students will make the most of this world-class education and use that foundation to make a meaningful impact in their chosen fields."

Associate Dean for Students and Alumni Matters Prof Chen Siyuan, also a Harvard alum himself, coached Joel and Wen Yee to the 2022 Jessup world championship final and has co-written various papers and books with them. Extending his congratulations to them, Prof Chen said, "Joel and Wen Yee represent the very best of SMU in many ways. Their ability and willingness to learn have always been exemplary, but above all, they have always given back and constantly helped those who came after them. They know they stood on the shoulders of giants."



SMU Alumni

As AI systems become increasingly embedded in sectors such as healthcare, finance, recruitment, and autonomous driving, questions surrounding legal accountability and responsibility are becoming more pressing than ever.

In a recent 𝘓𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘩𝘦 𝘡𝘢𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘰 commentary by Ding Bo, Chief Technology Officer of a local technology company, examining these issues, ’s Prof Gary Chan’s research was cited in discussions on the legal and ethical challenges posed by opaque or “black box” AI decision-making processes, particularly where it becomes difficult to determine responsibility when harm occurs.

The author referenced Prof Chan’s 2025 academic paper published in 𝘔𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘓𝘢𝘸 𝘐𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭, which noted that the opaque nature of AI systems makes it difficult for hospitals and doctors to predict how medical AI may behave in specific situations, thereby complicating accountability when adverse outcomes arise.

As Singapore continues to advance its AI governance and autonomous vehicle regulatory frameworks, ’s research contributes important legal perspectives on transparency, liability, and accountability in the deployment of emerging technologies.

Read Prof Chan’s paper here: https://smu.sg/5lm0

Read the commentary here: https://www.zaobao.com.sg/forum/views/story20260514-9048988

In a recent case, Nagaraj V. Mylandia v PI Opportunities Fund-I [2026] INSC 298, the Supreme Court of India, the apex court of the Indian judicial system, cited extensively from 's Assoc Prof Adeline Chong’s journal article, ‘𝘚𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪-𝘚𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘯𝘨’ 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘭: 𝘍𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘋𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘓𝘢𝘸, as part of this landmark decision.

The case concerned whether the doctrine of transnational issue estoppel prevented parties in Indian proceedings from challenging the enforceability of a Singapore arbitral award that had already been confirmed by the Singapore High Court. In addressing this issue, the Court engaged closely with Assoc Prof Chong’s analysis of whether issue estoppel should arise over foreign decisions on the governing law of a claim, particularly where courts across jurisdictions apply different choice of law frameworks.

Assoc Prof Chong’s article examines the broader tensions between finality in litigation and the differing public policy and choice of law considerations that may arise across legal systems. It argues that, in principle, issue estoppel should apply to determinations of governing law, while recognising important exceptions where overriding mandatory rules or public policy considerations are involved.

The Supreme Court of India’s substantial engagement with Assoc Prof Chong’s scholarship highlights the growing international significance of ’s research in shaping judicial reasoning on complex cross-border disputes and advancing the development of private international law globally.

Read the article here: https://smu.sg/43er

[Announcement] The SMU Law Academy (SMULA) has a new online home! As part of our continued efforts to better serve the legal profession and lifelong learners, the SMU Law Academy website has moved to smula.smu.edu.sg.

As a leading provider of continuing legal education and professional development, SMULA delivers high-quality seminars, executive programmes, and academic auditing opportunities designed to help legal professionals stay ahead of emerging legal developments and deepen their expertise.

Helmed by distinguished faculty, judges, senior practitioners, and industry experts, SMULA's programmes offer practical insights and thought leadership across a wide range of legal disciplines.

🔗 Visit us for more information at: smula.smu.edu.sg

Alumni Elliot Teng (LLB '24) was diagnosed with severe bilateral hearing loss at just two years old — but he never let that define his path. At Singapore Management University, Elliot navigated challenges with resilience and determination, supported by his family — especially his mother, who dedicated herself to his early development. At SMU, the seminar-style learning environment and close faculty support enabled him to participate actively, take on leadership roles, and grow both academically and personally.

Beyond the classroom, Elliot mentored juniors in legal writing, coached peers in mediation and negotiation, and engaged with the wider community — from supporting parents of children with hearing loss to empowering youth through public speaking and problem-solving.

In this episode of Faces of SMU, Elliot reflects on resilience, community, and his commitment to advocating for the disabled community — showing that life is not defined by limitations, but by how we rise above them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8hOvCx3dFs

He was born with hearing loss. Now he uses law to advocate for others | Elliot Teng | Faces of SMU Elliot Teng was diagnosed with severe bilateral hearing loss at jus...

𝘌𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘊𝘰𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘗𝘰𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘊𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘦 𝘗𝘵𝘦 𝘓𝘵𝘥 𝘷 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘗𝘰𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘊𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘦 𝘗𝘵𝘦 𝘓𝘵𝘥 [2025] 1 SLR 914 clarifies Singapore’s approach to trade mark infringement, particularly in the context of internet advertising. Family Podiatry Centre Pte Ltd used Google advertisements featuring keywords such as “east coast podiatry” to promote its podiatry clinic. East Coast Podiatry Centre Pte Ltd, owner of a registered trade mark that included the words "East Coast Podiatry", alleged that Family Podiatry’s advertisements amounted to trade mark infringement under sections 27(1) and/or 27(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1998 (2020 Rev Ed).

The General Division of the High Court rejected East Coast Podiatry’s claims. As part of its decision, the court applied 𝘎𝘰𝘰𝘨𝘭𝘦 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘚𝘈𝘙𝘓 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘷 𝘓𝘰𝘶𝘪𝘴 𝘝𝘶𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘰𝘯 𝘔𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘳 𝘚𝘈 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘴 [2010] IP & T 992 (“Google France”) from the Court of Justice of the European Union. On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal but on different grounds. The Court of Appeal also rejected the use of Google France in Singapore's context.

Writing for student publication Lexicon, Year 3 LL.B. Student Goh Jia Ying summarises the decision here: https://smulexicon.com/2026/04/27/trade-mark-infringement-in-the-age-of-internet-advertising-east-coast-podiatry-centre-pte-ltd-v-family-podiatry-centre-pte-ltd-2025-1-slr-914-2025-sgca-28/

This case summary is part of a Supreme Court initiative involving students from , where our students summarise selected Court of Appeal judgments with the objective of fostering greater public awareness of these cases and their implications.

recently concluded its Taiwan Study Mission – an essential component of the LAW4025 Overseas Project Experience (Law in Asia) course - an enriching and memorable learning journey that gave students the opportunity to explore the intersections of law, public policy, innovation, technology, and business in one of Asia’s most dynamic economies.

Among the highlights was a visit to National Chengchi University (NCCU), its renowned Dah Hsian Seetoo Library and the Graduate Institute of Technology, Innovation and Intellectual Property Management (TIIP). Through engaging discussions with faculty and students, our delegation gained valuable insights into Taiwan’s approach to intellectual property, innovation management, and interdisciplinary legal education. Equally meaningful were the exchanges between students from both institutions, which fostered new perspectives on legal education, career pathways, and the importance of global collaboration in the legal profession.

Our students also benefitted from unique opportunities to engage with leading industry and public-sector stakeholders. At Ørsted and the Taiwan Offshore Wind Industry Association (TOWIA), they learned about Taiwan’s renewable energy ambitions, the legal and regulatory frameworks supporting offshore wind development, and the collaborative efforts required to drive sustainable growth. A visit to Foxconn Technology Group provided a fascinating look into one of the world’s leading technology manufacturers, exposing students to developments in artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, smart technologies, and electric vehicles, while highlighting the legal and commercial issues that accompany innovation on a global scale.

The study mission further offered a rare glimpse into Taiwan’s democratic and legal institutions. Through visits to the Legislative Yuan and Judicial Yuan, students deepened their understanding of Taiwan’s legislative process, observed parliamentary proceedings, and explored the important work of the Constitutional Court in upholding democracy, constitutional governance, and human rights. These experiences brought to life many of the legal and public policy concepts discussed in the classroom.

Beyond the academic and professional insights gained, the programme fostered meaningful cultural exchange, lasting friendships, and a deeper appreciation of how law operates within different social, political, and economic contexts. extends its heartfelt gratitude to Associate Professor Luke Hung-Yu Chuang and our friends at National Chengchi University and TIIP, Vanessa Huang and Li-Wei Lee of Ørsted and TOWIA, Harriet Chen and the team at Foxconn Technology Group, as well as the Legislative Yuan and Judicial Yuan, for their warm hospitality and generous sharing. Their contributions made this study mission a truly immersive and transformative experience for our students.

-X

's Assoc Prof Dorcas Quek Anderson recently published a journal article in the International Journal of Conflict Management, titled 𝘕𝘦𝘨𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘵 𝘢 𝘋𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦: 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘔𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘕𝘦𝘨𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘛𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘴, co-authored with Ngo Tra My. Supported by the Ministry of Education, Singapore’s Academic Research Fund Tier 2, the study examines how different communication media influence negotiation outcomes, and how these effects are shaped by negotiator characteristics.

Drawing on an experimental study involving 400 participants negotiating a relational dispute across face-to-face, videoconferencing, audio call, and synchronous text messaging formats, the research found that text-based negotiations generally produced poorer outcomes, while face-to-face interactions fostered greater trust between unfamiliar parties.

Notably, the study also found that negotiator traits—including conflict management style and personality traits such as extraversion and conscientiousness—significantly shaped the impact of communication medium on negotiation success. These findings offer important insights into the relationship between technology, human behaviour, and effective dispute resolution in an increasingly digital world.

Read the article: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/4831/

Moot court has always been an integral part of legal education -- perhaps even more so now in the age of AI. Recent wins by our law schools in the Jessup have underscored Singapore's commitment to excellence in this craft, and in a recent piece for the Law Gazette (https://lawgazette.com.sg/practice/the-young-lawyer/moot-court-mythology-and-meaning/), Professor Chen Siyuan and Kenny Lau'14 document some of Singapore's biggest milestones in international moot competitions over the past six decades. In addition to exploring this rich history, the piece also suggests how mooting contributes to the creation of an imperative mythology and the search for purpose in the enterprise of law.

Here at , mooting has helped create strong bridges between generations of students and alumni too. While we are proud of our mooters' many achievements, we are proudest of our alumni who, recognising what it is that helped them succeed, keep giving back and paying it forward. They are emblematic of the ethos of our Ian Taylor International Moots Programme: anyone can get to moot -- and everyone will be willing to help you.





Learn more about our moots programme here: https://vimeo.com/1033450668

’s Prof Aurelio Gurrea-Martínez recently published an article in the American Journal of Comparative Law, titled 𝘐𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘺 𝘓𝘢𝘸 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘭𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘭 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩: 𝘓𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘭𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘭 𝘕𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩.

In this article, Prof Gurrea-Martínez examined how insolvency innovations emerging from the Global South can inform insolvency reforms in advanced economies. The article builds on a research project conducted by Prof Gurrea-Martínez analysing insolvency laws in more than 70 jurisdictions, as part of his global insolvency index and his book, 𝘙𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘐𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘺 𝘓𝘢𝘸 𝘪𝘯 𝘌𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘌𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘦𝘴, published by Cambridge University Press.

In this new article, Prof Gurrea-Martínez argued that the academic and policy debate in insolvency law has traditionally been dominated by a Global North perspective, with legal reforms and policy ideas generally flowing from jurisdictions such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union to countries in the Global South. Against this background, the article highlights the importance of mutual learning and demonstrates how solutions developed in emerging economies can also provide valuable lessons for advanced jurisdictions.

The article provides concrete examples of insolvency innovations from countries including Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Myanmar, Peru, the Philippines, Thailand, and Uruguay, and explains how these reforms may contribute to improving insolvency systems in jurisdictions such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Europe, New Zealand, and Singapore.

Read the full article: https://academic.oup.com/ajcl/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ajcl/avaf036/8676545