Adeline Chong joined SMU in November 2007. She was formerly a lecturer at the School of Law, University of Nottingham. She obtained First Class Honours from the University of Birmingham and subsequently was awarded a scholarship to pursue a Ph.D in Nottingham. The thesis looked at the choice of law issues concerning establishing the voidness of a contract and the restitutionary aftermath of voidness. She has published in leading peer-reviewed journals such as the Law Quarterly Review, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly and the Journal of Private International Law. She is the co-author of Hill and Chong, International Commercial Disputes: Commercial Conflict of Laws in English Courts (Oxford, Hart, 4th edn, 2010). She is the Project Lead of the Asian Business Law Institute’s project on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Asia. Her work has been cited by the Singapore, Hong Kong, New South Wales and New Zealand Court of Appeals, the Singapore and New Zealand High Courts, the UK Law Commission, as well as in leading texts on conflict of laws such as Dicey, Morris and Collins on the Conflict of Laws (15th edition, 2012). She has also been invited to present papers by the British Association of Canadian Studies, British Institute of International and Comparative Law, Kyushu University and the University of Sydney. She has conducted courses for the Attorney-General Chambers of Malaysia and delivered Continuing Professional Development Talks for Singapore’s Attorney-General Chamber’s Academy and the Law Society of Singapore. She has appeared as an expert on Singapore law before a Finnish court and issued a declaration on Singapore law for a US class action. She was awarded the 2013 School of Law Research Excellence Award and was appointed as a Lee Kong Chian Fellow in 2015. She was a recipient of the School of Law’s Dean’s Teaching Excellence Award in 2016, 2018 and 2020.
The 9th Journal of Private International Law Conference was due to be hosted by the Singapore Management University in 2021. Due to the ongoing pandemic, the Editors of the Journal (Professor Jonathan Harris QC of King’s College, London and Professor Paul Beaumont FRSE of the University of Stirling) and the conference organiser (Associate Professor Adeline […]
A foreign judgment is generally not to be reviewed on the merits at the recognition and enforcement stage. Yet, an exception has always been carved out for fraud under the common law rules on the basis that ‘fraud unravels everything’ (Lazarus Estates Ltd v Beasley [1956] 1 QB 702, 712 per Lord Denning). Thus, English […]
Readers previously obtained a preview of the
In January 2018, we
In Ivanishvili, Bidzina v Credit Suisse Trust Ltd [2020] SGCA 62, the Singapore Court of Appeal considered a number of issues: (1) whether a plaintiff could amend its Statement of Claim at the appellate stage to tilt the balance of connecting factors towards Singapore; (2) whether a clause in the trust deed identifying Singapore as […]
Written by Dr Meng Yu and Dr Guodong Du, co-founders of China Justice Observer. [Note: Click on the tables to enlarge them.] A list of cases on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments between China and twenty (20) States and regions has been published by China Justice Observer, a legal information provider based in […]
Qatar is the third signatory State to the UN Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (“Singapore Convention on Mediation”) to have ratified it. The other two are Singapore and Fiji (see previous post
Singapore and Fiji have each deposited instruments of ratification at the UN Headquarters on 25 February 2020. The UN Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (“Singapore Convention on Mediation”) facilitates the cross-border enforcement of international commercial settlement agreements reached through mediation (see previous post
In Bi Xiaoqing v China Medical Technologies [2019] SGCA 50, the Singapore Court of Appeal provided clarity on the extent of the court’s power to grant Mareva relief in support of foreign proceedings. The first and second respondents were companies incorporated in the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands. The action was pursued by […]
On 3rd October, the amendments to the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (“REFJA”) came into force. REFJA is based on the UK Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933, but in this recent round of amendments has deviated in some significant ways from the 1933 Act. The limitation to judgments from “superior courts” has been […]