Cambridge Law: Public Lectures from the Faculty of Law

The Cambridge Pro Bono Project (CPP) hosted the annual lecture featuring Professor Judge Leonardo Brant (International Court of Justice; Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil) on Thursday 16th May 2025.The Cambridge Pro Bono Project is a research centre that draws on the subject-matter expertise of graduate researchers and Faculty experts to produce reports on a wide range of public interest matters. Every year, we invite distinguished speakers to address our researchers, staff, and students at the University of Cambridge. For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/ Twitter (https://twitter.com/Cam_ProBono) or Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/CamProBono).

In the mare liberum, seafarers are protected by the age-old maritime duty to rescue anyone in distress at sea. This principle has also been codified in various treaties, including the 1974 Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention. This convention was adopted in response to the Titanic disaster and mainly focuses on safety on board of commercial ships. But the most vulnerable people at sea nowadays clearly are irregular migrants, sailing by rubber boats rather than cruise ships. Formally, these migrants are also protected by the non-refoulement principle under refugee and human rights law. Yet in practice, they are subject to a politics of protection which operates through an intermeshing of different legal regimes. Moreover, the rubber boats play a crucial role in this politics of protection, and ultimately preclude the irregular migrants from the protection of the non-refoulement principle. Through the case of the rubber boat, as a transnational legal encounter of people, rules and objects, I investigate the uneven geographies and temporalities of international law as an everyday practice. Moreover, by paying critical attention to how objects participate in actualising certain sets of relations and potentials over others, the concept of transnational legal encounters enables us to critically re-think the production of meanings, legalities and politics, layering complexities to law's work in and to the world.Tanja Aalberts is Professor of Law and Politics at the department of Transnational Legal Studies, VU Amsterdam. She is the author of 'Constructing Sovereignty between Politics and Law' (Routledge, 2012), co-author of 'The Changing Practices of International Law' (CUP, 2018) and co-edited 'The Power of Legality. Practices of International Law and their Politics' (CUP, 2016). Her work on the interplay between politics and law within global governance, misrecognition, colonial treaties and interdisciplinarity has been published in various journals and handbooks in International Law and International Relations. She was a founding board member of the European International Studies Association, and editor of the Leiden Journal of International Law. She currently is series editor for Voices in IR with Oxford University Press and member of the Advisory Council International Affairs for the Dutch government. Her current research focuses on transnational legal encounters and the aesthetics of international law. She is also doing archival research and writing a book on the Peace Palace as the first building of the international community.https://www.lcil.cam.ac.uk/press/events/2025/05/friday-lecture-rubber-boats-transnational-legal-encounters-mediterranean-prof-tanja-aalberts-vu

Closing address by the Editors-in-Chief and Conference Convenor (Marno Swart, Renatus Otto Franz Derler (00:00) and Kevin Zou(01:33)).This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

Moderator: Joshua Kelly, Freshfields.1. Ms Paulina Rundel, PhD Candidate, University of Vienna: The UN Charter Navigating the Moon: The Moon Agreement versus the Artemis Accords. (02:10)2. Dr Abbie-Rose Hampton, Research Associate; Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellow, King's College London: Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing and the Pandemic Treaty: Maintaining the Status Quo? (20:55)3. Dr Milena Sterio, Charles R. Emrick Jr. – Calfee Halter & Griswold Professor of Law, Cleveland State University College of Law: Artificial Intelligence and Individual Criminal Responsibility: A Paradox or a Possibility? (34:48)4. Ms Martina Elia Vitoloni, DCL Candidate, McGill University: Orbiting Beyond Control: International Law and the Rise of Private Power in Outer Space. (50:40)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:http://cilj.co.uk/

Moderator: Commodore Ian Park, UK Royal Navy; Visiting Lecturer in Law, Yale Law School.1. Ms Liuva Ramos Masó, Early Career Researcher (Ghent Alumni), Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): Hide and seek with private military companies (pmcs) the urgent need for an international regulatory framework. (01:48)2. Dr Kostia Gorobets, Assistant Professor of International Law, University of Groningen: The Law of Multipolarity: How Russia Creates Its Alternative Legality. (17:02)3. Dr Alberto Rinaldi, Postdoctoral Researcher, Lund University: Cognitive Warfare in the Biotechnological Age: Threats and Challenges to International Law. (29:18)4. Dr Mohamad Janaby, Lecturer, University of Glasgow: Counter-Terrorism and Government Recognition: The Intersection of International Law in Post-Conflict Transitions. (44:21)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:http://cilj.co.uk/

Moderator: Bart Wasiak, Senior Associate, Arnold & Porter.1. Dr Ernst-Ulrich Petersman, Professor Emeritus, European University Insitutite: Constitutional Pluralism as Political Driver for Multipolar Re-ordering of International Legal Systems. (04:35)2. Dr Konstantina Georgaki, Assistant Professor in International and European Economic Law, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki: The EU's defence to economic warfare: A long-awaited U-turn? (21:35)3. Dr Abdulkadir Nacar, Researcher, Istanbul Univeristy: Decentralized Finance as a Tool for Objective Global Sanctions: Integrating Capital Influence within the UN System. (40:53)4. Ms Khrystyna Kostiushko, Independent Counsel: Consequences of Incorporation/Annexation of Territory for the Spatial Scope of Application of Investment Treaties. (55:00)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:http://cilj.co.uk/

Moderator: Dr Tugba Basaran, Director of the Centre for the Study of Global Human Movement, University of Cambridge.1. Dr Lora Izvorova, LSE Fellow, London School of Economics and Political Sciences: Deconstructing Dignity: Two Archetypes in European Human Rights Law. (01:10)2. Dr Chloë McRae Gilgan, Senior Lecturer, University of Lincoln: Refuge in Peril: The Responsibility to Protect Populations Fleeing Mass Atrocities. (19:18)3. Dr Bethan Hall, Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore: The Human Rights Obligations of Corporate Sovereigns. (38:57)4. Dr Gabriela García Escobar, Professor of Public International Law, Universidad Panamericana: Two Models of Universality: What are the Prospects for Human Rights in a Fragmented World? (55:45)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:http://cilj.co.uk/

Moderator: Émilie Pottle, Barrister, Temple Garden Chambers.1. Ms Danielle Flanagan, Associate, Hogan Lovells LLP: Rethinking Universal Jurisdiction: A Shift Towards Greater Universality? (01:54)2. Dr Ata Hindi, Murphy Institute Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Tulane University School of Law: Here Comes Your Ghost Again: Individual Immunities for International Crimes. (16:51)3. Dr Giovanni Chiarini, Assistant Professor of Law, Alfaisal University: Negotiated Justice Transformation: From Post-WWII Military Tribunals' Ethical Denial to Modern International Courts' Procedural Approaches.(34:59)Please note there are some audio glitches on this recording. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience.This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:http://cilj.co.uk/

Moderator: Jessica Simor KC, Barrister, Matrix Chambers.1. Ms Crisela Bernardino, Researcher in Corporate Climate Litigation, British Insitutue of International and Comparative Law (BIICL): In the Interests of Climate Justice: International Law and Decolonial Perspectives on the Philippine Climate Case Against the ‘Carbon Majors'. (02:08)2. Mr Selman Aksünger, PhD Candidate, Maastricht University: Permanent Sovereignty Over Maritime Zones: A Response to Sea Level Rise Induced Coastal Instability. (19:39)3. Ms Jessica Crow, PhD Candidate, University of Cambridge: Emissions Trading: An Emerging Tension at the Nexus of Investment Protection and Climate Governance. (34:48)4. Ms Katharina Neumann, DPhil Candidate, University of Oxford: The Forgotten Sector: The UN Climate Change Regime and Agricultural Emissions. (52:02)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:http://cilj.co.uk/

Moderator: Stephen Fietta KC, Founder, Fietta LLP.1. Dr Jolyon Ford SFHEA, Professor, Australian National University; and Dr Imogen Saunders, Associate Professor, Australian National University: International Law as Geology: Crawford's core/periphery metaphor and challenges to the contemporary international legal order. (02:18)2. Ms Jessie Phyffer, LLD Candidate, University of Pretoria; Research Associate University of Johannesburg: The “International Community”: A Useful Rhetorical Technique to Induce a Common Interest-Based International Legal Order. (17:40)3. Dr Sarah McCosker, Founding Partner, Lexbridge Lawyers; and Dr Esmé Shirlow, Associate Professor, Australian National University: The Rise of Non- Treaty Instruments: Challenges and Implications for the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law. (27:50)4. Mr Taran Molloy, Barrister (New Zealand): De-pluralising International Legal Personality: International Organisations and the 20th Century Shift to Statehood. (45:42)5. Mr Sebastian von Massow, PhD Candidate, European University Institute: Litigating Colonial Self-Determination. (59:22)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see:http://cilj.co.uk/

Keynote address 4 – Ambassador Rena Lee: 'The Institutionalisation of International Law in a Multipolar World'Introduction (00:00)Keynote 4 (01:18)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

Keynote address 2 – Judge Tomas Heidar, President, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: 'Bringing Climate Change into the Realm of the Law of the Sea Convention: The ITLOS Advisory Opinion'Introduction (00:00)Keynote 2 (02:49)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

Welcoming address by the Editors-in-Chief (Marno Swart and Renatus Otto Franz Derler) (00:00)Welcoming address by the Honorary Editor-in-Chief (Dr Rumiana Yotova, Assistant Professor in International Law) (04:49)Introduction (08:10)Keynote address 1 – Judge Bogdan Aurescu, International Court of Justice: 'Lessons Learned: the Recent Activity of the International Court of Justice; the Work of the International Law Commission on Sea-Level Rise in Relation to International Law' (10:21)This is a recording from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law ConferenceThis is a collection of recordings from the events of the 14th Annual Cambridge International Law Conference, held under the title 'Navigating a Multipolar World: Challenges to the Post-WWII Status Quo of International Law' on 28 & 29 April 2025 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.For more information about the conference, and the Journal, see: http://cilj.co.uk/

The British Association of Comparative Law (BACL) held a discussion of Dr Irini Katsirea's book, 'Press Freedom and Regulation in a Digital Era: A Comparative Study' (2024) on 29th April 2025.This book examines the challenges for press freedom in the nascent digital news ecosystem. Drawing upon decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as from German, UK and US case law, this comparative work explores the regulation of the press in the digital era and the impact of the proliferating media laws, policies, and jurisprudence on press freedom.Professor Jacob Rowbottom (University of Oxford) chaired the discussion between Dr Irini Katsirea (University of Sheffield), Dr Peter Coe, (University of Birmingham), Emeritus Professor Thomas Gibbons (University of Manchester), and Emeritus Professor Bernd Holznagel (University of Münster).

Speaker: Professor Niva Elkin Koren (Tel Aviv University)Session 4: Concluding Thoughts – AI Transforming IPOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Professor Tanya Aplin (King's College London)Session 3: AI Transforming the Scope of Protection and EnforcementOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Mr Dennis Collopy (University of Hertfordshire)Session 3: AI Transforming the Scope of Protection and EnforcementOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Professor Sean Flynn (Washington College of Law)Session 3: AI Transforming the Scope of Protection and EnforcementOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Professor Mireille van Eechoud (University of Amsterdam)Session 3: AI Transforming the Scope of Protection and EnforcementOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Mr David Stone (White & Case LLP)Session 2: AI Transforming IP Application / Registration Processes and Eligibility TestsOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Professor Dev Gangjee (University of Oxford)Session 2: AI Transforming IP Application / Registration Processes and Eligibility TestsOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Professor Ryan Abbott (University of Surrey)Session 2: AI Transforming IP Application / Registration Processes and Eligibility Tests On Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Dr Alina Trapova (UCL)Session 1: AI Transforming Protected Subject MatterOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Professor Mateo Aboy (University of Cambridge)Session 1: AI Transforming Protected Subject MatterOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Speaker: Dr Jennifer Cobbe (University of Cambridge)Introduction: Primer on AI and Creations of the (Human) MindOn Saturday 29th March 2025, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) held its Annual Spring Conference entitled 'Is AI Transforming IP?'For the last few years, lots of attention has been paid to AI and IP. The Supreme Court has already considered whether AI can be regarded as an inventor. There is also on-going litigation, in various jurisdictions, on whether training AI systems with copyright material infringes copyright, in what circumstances the outputs might infringe; as well as when, if at all, AI-generated content, designs or other outputs might be protected by intellectual property rights and, if so, for whose benefit.While these are important questions that involve the application of the existing understandings of the law to new factual scenarios, the conference moved beyond them to focus on: (i) what AI reveals about existing law; and (ii) how AI might be changing IP, altering the legal tests with which we have become familiar, as well as the assumptions that underlie them – and what the implications might be.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-spring-conference

Professor Kimberly D. Krawiec from the University of Virginia School of Law explores "repugnant transactions and taboo trades" — markets that are morally contested and sometimes even prohibited, such as sex work, commercial surrogacy, and the sale of organs, eggs, and sperm. She asks how we, as a society, decide what is up for sale and what is off-limits. The controversies here are not about the dangers of markets themselves, but rather the dangers of buying/selling certain goods or services. Advocates of market restrictions seek to define the ethical boundaries of the marketplace – to identify the specific goods and services that are inappropriate for market trading, and to explain why these restrictions should exist even for apparently willing buyers and sellers.Although all cultures have deemed some transactions too sacred for the marketplace, the targets of these restrictions have varied widely, even within a given time period. For example, prostitution is currently legal in much of the world but illegal in most of the United States. Meanwhile, commercial surrogacy and paid egg donation are legal in much of the United States but illegal in many other parts of the world.This talk delves into these and other restricted trades. It identifies how they are regulated by legal regimes as well as social norms, evaluates the consequences of different approaches, and explores potential paths forward.About the Speaker: Professor Kimberly D. Krawiec holds the Charles O. Gregory Professorship of Law at the University of Virginia. Her current research analyses “taboo trades” — exchanges that are contested by society and, in some cases, forbidden altogether. She has written on commercial surrogacy, egg and sperm markets, and sex work. At the moment, much of her work is on incentives for organ donation. Another area of her research centres on the regulation of financial markets and business organizations. Prof. Krawiec has extensively examined the administrative process surrounding the Volcker Rule, a complex and highly contested provision of the Dodd-Frank Act. She has also researched corporate boards of directors. Through an ethnographic method, this work analyses directors' views on the workings of the corporate boardroom and board relations with management, with a special emphasis on directors' views on race and gender diversity in the boardroom.With a wealth of experience in commodity and derivatives law, she has also been a commentator for the Central European and Eurasian Law Initiative (CEELI) of the American Bar Association and has taught at top institutions including Duke, North Carolina, Harvard, and Northwestern, where she won the Robert Childres Award for Teaching Excellence.The lecture begins at 03:44Baron Cornelius Ver Heyden de Lancey (1889-1984) was a wealthy and public-spirited Dutchman who at different times in his life was a dentist, doctor, surgeon, barrister and art historian. In 1970 he created the De Lancey and De La Hanty Foundation, to promote studies in medico-legal topics. The Foundation generously gave Cambridge the Ver Heyden de Lancey Fund, which since 1996 has funded occasional public lectures on medico-legal issues of current interest.For more information about the Baron Ver Heyden de Lancey Lecture series, please see http://www.lml.law.cam.ac.uk/events/vhdl-events

Speaker: Professor Victor Kattan (University of Nottingham)Chair: Professor Antony Anghie (Goodhart Professor, National University of Singapore and the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law)Abstract: In this presentation I will provide an account of the statehood of Palestine. After outlining the basic principles relating to statehood in international law, I will argue that recognition plays an important role in such assessments. My talk will focus on four key moments extending from the time of the League of Nations to the United Nations period. In presenting this account, I will address my own experience as a legal adviser to the State of Palestine in the negotiations on the adoption of General Assembly Resolution 67/19 in 2012 when the State of Palestine was conferred observer state status at the UN.Biography: Victor Kattan is Assistant Professor of Public International Law at the School of Law at the University of Nottingham. His publications include The Palestine Question in International Law (British Institute of International and Comparative Law, 2008). From Coexistence to Conquest: International Law and the Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict 1891-1949 (Pluto Press, 2009). The Breakup of India and Palestine: The Causes and Legacies of Partition (Manchester University Press, 2023, with Amit Ranjan), and Making Endless War: The Vietnam and Arab-Israeli Conflicts in the History of International Law (Michigan University Press, 2023, with Brian Cuddy).Professor Anghie: 01:22Professor Kattan: 12:23For more information about CULWOB see: https://www.cambridgesu.co.uk/organisation/culwob/

Lecture summary: This lecture will explore the parameters of State immunity at the international level and as reflected in different national legal systems (including England & Wales, the United States and others). It will include an overview of foundational and more recent jurisprudence in international and domestic courts, and will give particular focus to select aspects of State immunity in the context of enforcement against State assets.Hussein Haeri KC is a Partner at Withers LLP in London and Head of the firm's Public International Law Group. He is a King's Counsel and was the only Solicitor Advocate to take Silk in 2024. Hussein has extensive experience as counsel and advocate on international dispute resolution matters for almost 20 years in London, Paris and New York, including before the ICJ, ITLOS, under ICSID and UNCITRAL arbitration rules and in national courts. He has been recognised for many years by the major legal directories including Chambers & Partners, which refers to him as an "outstanding lawyer", and Legal 500 which states that "he combines huge intellectual powers with great client handling".He is a Partner Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, a Senior Fellow at SOAS in London and has lectured at various other universities including the University of Oxford, Sciences Po in Paris and Roma Tre University in Rome.

The eighteenth Annual International Intellectual Property Lecture was delivered by Robert P. Merges, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Professor of Law and Technology at UC Berkeley School of Law, on 18 March 2025.The lecture entitled 'Cousins, Not Twins: Patent Claim Scope vs. The Breadth of Patent Enforcement' took place at Emmanuel College, Cambridge.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/

The Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS) hosts an annual public lecture in honour of Lord Mackenzie-Stuart, the first British Judge to be President of the Court of Justice. Among the eminent scholars of European legal studies invited to give the lecture are Professor Joseph Weiler, former Judge David Edwards of the European Court of Justice, and Advocate-General Francis Jacobs of the European Court of Justice. The texts of the Mackenzie-Stuart Lectures are published in the Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies.The 2025 Mackenzie-Stuart Lecture was delivered by The Rt. Hon. Nick Thomas–Symonds MP, Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Minister for the Constitution and European Union Relations) under the title 'The UK's Relationship with the European Union' on 13 March 2025.Nick Thomas–Symonds was elected as the MP for Torfaen in May 2015, and was appointed Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Minister for the Constitution and European Union Relations) at the Cabinet Office on 8 July 2024.Lecture begins at 02:58More information about this lecture, including photographs from the event, is available from the Centre for European Legal Studies website at:https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/mackenzie-stuart-lectures

Speaker: Dr Bernadette Zelger, University of InnsbruckAbstract: The debate about the future of the European Union has long left academic circles, arrived in the midst of society and been awarded political attention. Meanwhile, there has been an increase of Euroscepticism accompanied by more nationalist political developments echoed in the swings to the right all across the EU. These developments may, arguably at least in parts, be explained by social resentments of the peoples of Europe. While acknowledging that law constructs and contributes to a social reality of its own it is thus, arguably also about the lack of a genuine socio-economic equilibrium within the law and political system of the EU. This imbalance is not only found within the EU legal constitutional framework, but also within the case-law of the European Court of Justice. However, possible solutions to solve this socio-economic imbalance are limited: It is either (i) Treaty reform or, alternatively, (ii) a change in the approach of the Court in its jurisprudence. While these alternatives are both valid and, to some extent, mutually exclusive, they unveil and epitomise different visions as regards the future of the European Union. However, while acknowledging the differences in the approach, they are arguably different means to serve the very same end: Warrant the European Union's future success. For more information see:https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Speaker: Professor Madhavi Sunder, Georgetown University Law SchoolAbstract: Innovation thrives on borrowing from creators, past and far-flung. When does cultural exchange cross the line into cultural misappropriation or theft decried as “cultural appropriation”? Notably, today's culture wars increasingly turn on intellectual property claims, with calls for attending to the legal and ethical implications of dominant cultural creators taking and profiting from the innovations of disadvantaged and minority creators. Black creators embark on a #TikTokStrike to protest white influencers siphoning credit and revenues from black creatives. The Mexican Culture Minister calls out high end fashion labels for stealing local designs. Black dancers sue blockbuster video game Fortnite for copying dance moves without credit or royalties. Native activists challenge racist trademarks. The implication is clear: intellectual property has a cultural appropriation problem. Is intellectual property an appropriate legal tool for addressing cultural appropriation? This Lecture builds on growing scholarship studying dispossession and racial capitalism to consider intellectual property's role in promoting or stifling recognition and redistribution for diverse creators.Biography: Madhavi Sunder is the Frank Sherry Professor of Intellectual Property Law at the Georgetown University Law Center. She is a widely published and influential scholar of intellectual property law, law and technology, women's human rights, and international development. In 2024-2025, she is the Co-director of the Center for Transnational Legal Studies in London.For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Speakers: Professor Vanessa Munro (University of Warwick) and Professor Miranda Horvath (University of Suffolk)Professors Munro and Horvath both actively contributed to Operation Soteria, the joint project between the police and CPS to rethink how allegations of sexual violence should be investigated and prosecuted. In this public lecture they will reflect together on the data they collected and the findings concerning reasons for underperformance, myths and stereotypes affecting charging decisions and the treatment of complainants. They will conclude by reflecting on the prospects for sustainable improvement post-Soteria. There will be opportunities for the audience to ask questions at the end.For more information see: https://www.cccj.law.cam.ac.uk/past-events-0

On 28 February 2025 The Rt. Hon. Lord Briggs of Westbourne delivered the 2025 XXIV Old Buildings Lecture entitled "Equitable Ownership".Michael Townley Featherstone Briggs, Lord Briggs of Westbourne became a Justice of the Supreme Court in October 2017.Lord Briggs grew up around Portsmouth and Plymouth, following his naval officer father between ships, before spending his later childhood in West Sussex. He attended Charterhouse and Magdalen College, Oxford. A keen sailor and the first lawyer in his family, he practised in commercial and chancery work before being appointed to the High Court in 2006. He was the judge in charge of the extensive Lehman insolvency litigation from 2009 to 2013.Lord Briggs was appointed as a Lord Justice of Appeal in 2013. He was the judge in charge of the Chancery Modernisation Review in 2013, and led the Civil Courts Structure Review in 2015 to 2016. In January 2016 he was appointed Deputy Head of Civil Justice.Timings:Professor Graham Virgo - Introduction: 00:00The Rt. Hon. Lord Briggs of Westbourne: 02:07The XXIV Old Buildings Lecture is an annual address delivered by a guest of the Cambridge Private Law Centre, and the event is sponsored by XXIV Old Buildings.More information about this lecture is available from the Private Law Centre website:https://www.privatelaw.law.cam.ac.uk/events

Summary: This talk explains Sudan's descent into a horrific war that is the world's worst humanitarian crisis. The war has displaced over 11 million people, involved the targeting of civilians, including especially women, in mass violence, and precipitated a hunger crisis affecting over 24 million people, with over 630,000 currently facing famine. How, after a momentous civilian uprising in 2018-19 that toppled the dictator Omer el-Bashir after 30 years of authoritarian rule, did Sudan come to this? Unravelling the causes and events that led to tragedy begins with how counter-revolutionary actors within the State benefitted from the priorities of external peacemakers seeking to achieve a democratic transition in order to displace revolutionary forces, before carrying out a coup against that very transition. The war erupted when the counter-revolution itself unravelled, and its two primary bedfellows, the Sudan Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces fell-out violently with each other in a struggle for power. With complex regional geopolitical entanglements and drawing in other armed groups in Sudan, their war to the bitter end has mixed cruel indifference and intentional harm towards civilians in devastating ways. Remarkably, the revolutionary spirit of the Sudanese has not been vanquished, and has found expression in how neighbourhood resistance committees have transformed into ‘emergency response rooms' to deliver life-saving support. Sudan's plight and prospects lie precariously within these intersecting trajectories.Sharath Srinivasan is David and Elaine Potter Professor of International Politics at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of King's College, Cambridge. He is also Founding Director, and currently Co-Director, of the University of Cambridge's Centre of Governance and Human Rights (CGHR). Professor Srinivasan is a Fellow and Trustee of the Rift Valley Institute and a Trustee and Vice-President of the British Institute in Eastern Africa.Professor Srinivasan's work focuses on contentious politics in Africa in global perspective, from explaining failed peace interventions in civil wars to rethinking democratic politics in a digital age. He is the author of When Peace Kills Politics: International Intervention and Unending Wars in the Sudans (Hurst/Oxford University Press, 2021) and co-editor of Making and Breaking Peace in Sudan and South Sudan: The Comprehensive Peace Agreement and Beyond (British Academy/Oxford University Press, 2020).Chair: Dr Juliana Santos de Carvalho, Centre Fellow

Speaker: Professor Margo Bagley, Emory University School of Law Abstract: 2024 was a year for multilateral IP like no other. WIPO Member states adopted two new treaties last year: the WIPO Treaty on IP, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge and the Riyadh Design Law Treaty. Both were groundbreaking in their mention of one or more of genetic resources, traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and indigenous peoples and local communities, none of which are standard IP topics and all of which have been controversial additions to the normative work at WIPO. Moreover, both treaties address disclosure of origin for one or more of these controversial areas, another first for a WIPO treaty. I will discuss how these two treaties came to fruition and their ramifications for future multilateral IP treaty-making.Biography: Margo A. Bagley is Asa Griggs Candler Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law. She returned to Emory in 2016 after ten years at the University of Virginia School of Law, where she held the Hardy Cross Dillard chair. She was the Hieken Visiting Professor in Patent Law at Harvard Law School in Fall 2022. Her scholarship focuses on comparative issues relating to patents and biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and access to medicines, and IP and social justice issues. Professor Bagley served on two National Academies Committees on IP matters, is a technical expert to the African Union in World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) matters, and has served as a consultant to several United Nations organizations. She has served as a US Department of Commerce Commercial Law Development Program advisor and currently serves as a member of the U.S. DARPA ELSI Team for the BRACE project. She is an elected member of the American Law Institute and a faculty lecturer with the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, and also has taught patent related courses in China, Cuba, Israel, and Singapore. She has published numerous articles, book chapters, and monographs as well as two books with co-authors with a third on the way. She is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, practiced patent law with both Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, and Smith, Gambrell and Russell, and has been an expert witness in several patent cases. A chemical engineer by training, Professor Bagley worked in industry for several years before attending law school at Emory where she was a Woodruff Fellow. She is a co-inventor on patents on peanut butter and bedding technology. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Lecture summary: Property is a fundamental legal institution governing the use of things: who may own what, how and why. Given that such questions extend to a wide range of natural resources essential to human well-being, such as food, water and shelter, then it is reasonable to assume that human rights should play an important role in shaping property rights discourse and practice. And yet this assumption is somewhat misplaced. The relationship between property and human rights and property remains relatively underdeveloped in both practice and academic literature, and virtually non-existent when we move to the maritime domain. In this paper, I explore and question the role that property and human rights can and should play in the maritime domain. I outline how such rights arise and are protected under human rights instruments, before exploring how they might inform the moral and legal distribution of resources. In particular, I focus on how we might balance individual rights and public interests that arise in respect of property, and how these are informed by the nature of the oceans as a commons.Richard Barnes is Professor of International Law at the University of Lincoln and Adjunct Professor of Law at the Norwegian Centre for the Law of the Sea, the University of Tromsø. His current research focuses on the human right to property, ocean commons, and the BBNJ Agreement. He is widely published in the fields of international law and law of the sea. Property Rights and Natural Resources (2009), won the SLS Birks Book Prize for Outstanding Legal Scholarship. He has edited several collections of essays including Research Handbook on Plastics Regulation (2024), Frontiers in International Environmental Law. Oceans and Climate (2021), Research Handbook on Climate Change, Oceans and Coasts (2020), and The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Living Instrument (2016). Professor Barnes a member of the ILA Committee on the Protection of People at Sea. He has acted as a consultant for the WWF, Oceana, ClientEarth, the European Parliament, the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. He has also provided advice to foreign ministries. He has appeared numerous times before Parliamentary select committees on matters related to law of the sea, fisheries and Brexit. He is on the Editorial Board of International and Comparative Law Quarterly, the International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, the New Zealand Yearbook of International Law, the German Yearbook of International Law, and the Portuguese Yearbook of the Law of the Sea.

Speaker: Dr Stuart Baran is a barrister at specialist intellectual property chambers Three New Square IPAbstract: The UK Supreme Court has now given its long (and long-awaited) judgment in SkyKick v. Sky. It concerns the appropriate specification of goods and services as part of a trade mark application. In particular, the UKSC was asked to consider the circumstances in which a party applying for a specification broader than its intended commercial activities can be found to have applied in bad faith. The UKSC reversed the Court of Appeal on the approach in law, finding that Sky's trade mark registrations had been sought partly in bad faith, and should be partially invalidated. The Court found infringement of the remaining specification by one of SkyKick's products, but upheld the Court of Appeal's finding that there was no infringement by the other. It also found that it enjoyed a continuing jurisdiction to grant EU-wide relief given that these proceedings started before Brexit. Here I will focus on the part of the judgment about invalidity for bad faith. I will introduce what the Court has decided and its reasons, and then look at three questions: (i) to what extent does this judgment advance the law of invalidity for applying in bad faith?; (ii) is there now a difference between the extent of goods/services for which you can register your mark, and those for which you can enforce it?; and (iii) is this judgment likely to change applicants' approach to drafting their specifications?Biography: Dr Stuart Baran is a barrister at specialist intellectual property chambers Three New Square IP. After a degree in chemistry and doctorate in chemical physics, each at Oxford, he was called to the Bar in 2011 and has practised from Three New Square ever since, in all areas of IP but with particular emphases on trade marks and patents. Stuart was lucky to chair the Oxford International IP Moot for several years, starting during his DPhil. As a barrister, Stuart has appeared unled in every IP forum, from the UKIPO and European Patent Office to the EU General Court and Court of Justice as well as the UK High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. He has been involved in a number of seminal cases across the IP spectrum, including Actavis v. Lilly, Newron v. Comptroller-General, Sky v. SkyKick, and Thaler v. Comptroller-General. Alongside his private practice, Stuart is Standing Counsel to the Comptroller-General which means he represents and advises the UKIPO and government departments on intellectual property issues. He was awarded Legal 500 Junior of the Year for IP in 2018; Managing IP Junior of the Year in 2021 and 2024; and was profiled as a JUVE Patent “One to Watch” in 2023. Outside of work he is a keen orchestral violinist, cook and Italophile.For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Panel: '(Non-)Defining 'Gender' in the Crimes Against Humanity Draft: Possibilities, Alliances, and Strategies'Feminist activists, country representatives, and other civil society actors have debated how to define “gender” in international criminal law (ICL) for at least three decades. In the Rome Conference that established the International Criminal Court (ICC) and its Statute in 1998, defining “gender” was a hotly debated topic of negotiation. More recently, this debate has resurfaced in the steps leading to the International Law Commission's Draft Articles for a Crimes Against Humanity Treaty, and continues to be discussed in the deliberations at the Sixth Committee on the Draft Articles. The CAH Convention is now expected to be negotiated between 2026-2029, and, more than a mere point of contention, the concept of ‘gender' in its text can be crucial for prosecuting sexual and gender-based international crimes and thus fundamental to gender justice efforts worldwide. With this in mind, this roundtable gathers scholars and activists studying and working (often simultaneously) on the definition of gender in international criminal law, in an effort to learn from their specific positionalities, perceptions, and experiences about the challenges, strategies, and possibilities for (non-)defining the term.https://www.lcil.cam.ac.uk/press/events/2025/02/panel-queering-gender-crimes-against-humanity-draft-possibilities-alliances-and-strategies

Sovereign debt crises have surged since the end of the Bretton Woods system and currently threaten a lost decade for many countries across the world. Indermit Gill, in the World Bank Group's 2024 International Debt Report, describes the situation in many of the poorest countries as a ‘metastasising solvency crisis that continues to be misdiagnosed as a liquidity problem'. Despite their severe socioeconomic consequences, no comprehensive legal framework exists to address these crises—arguably the most significant gap in international economic law.This lecture, based on Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima's forthcoming book Governing Sovereign Debt Crises: The Case for International Sovereign Insolvency Law (Hart Publishing), makes the case for creating such a mechanism under international law. The book challenges prevailing narratives that attribute sovereign debt crises solely to debtor states' mismanagement or misfortunes, instead arguing that sovereign insolvency is a systemic feature of the international monetary system. Current solutions—voluntary, ad hoc, and fragmented—fail to equitably allocate losses across an increasingly diversified sovereign creditor base, leaving many creditors worse off. At the same time, debtor states and their populations remain vulnerable to macroeconomic crises and enduring austerity, which often lead to long-term economic stagnation.The book adopts a legal political economy approach to illustrate how power asymmetries among stakeholders and the absence of enforceable rules perpetuate inefficiencies and inequities in resolving sovereign debt crises. Drawing on the legal theory of finance, insolvency law, and common resource governance theory, it illustrates how these governance failures result in a dual tragedy: a tragedy of the commons and a tragedy of the anticommons. The lecture will also examine the growing complexity of sovereign debt markets, including the diversification of creditor types, the erosion of ‘gentlemen's agreements,' and the limitations of initiatives like the Paris Club and the G20's Common Framework for debt treatments. It concludes by arguing that only international sovereign insolvency rules can resolve the delays, inefficiencies, and inequities that plague sovereign debt restructuring, while exploring avenues for implementing such a proceeding and discussing the role of domestic law in a well-functioning international sovereign debt architecture.Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Leeds. Her research focuses on the intersection of law, finance, and sovereign debt within the broader context of global economic governance. Her research portfolio covers the legal governance of sovereign debt crises, the law and policy of international financial institutions, and the macroeconomic impact of financial law and regulation.Dr Patrício advises public entities, NGOs, and leading law firms on various aspects of financial and monetary law, including sovereign debt restructuring, financial regulation, and the governance of international financial institutions. Her work has been recognised with prestigious awards, including the 2022 Society of International Economic Law-Hart Prize and the 2022 John H. Jackson Prize, conferred by the Journal of International Economic Law. She also serves as a peer reviewer for top law and social sciences journals globally.

Oh Thursday 6th February 2025 Professor Campbell McLachlan KC delivered his 1973 Professor Inaugural Lecture: 'On the Interface between Public and Private International Law'.The lecture begins at 05:18Abstract: Our understanding of the operation of law beyond the nation State has been deeply shaped by two great disciplines: public and private international law. Yet surprisingly little systematic attention has been devoted to the relationship between the two. In his inaugural lecture as Professor of International Dispute Resolution in the University of Cambridge, McLachlan argues that the neglect of this interface is highly consequential for our understanding of law's capacity to control the State and the corporation, which are, respectively, the principal holders of public/political and private/economic power in the world.Campbell McLachlan is elected as Professor of Law (1973) in the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of Trinity Hall. He took up his chair in July 2024, specialising in International Dispute Resolution. A New Zealander, his career has spanned scholarship and practice in private and public international law. His principal works include: Foreign Relations Law (CUP 2014), International Investment Arbitration: Substantive Principles (2nd ed, OUP 2017) and The Principle of Systemic Integration in International Law (2024). He is a Specialist Editor of Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws. He gave the General Course at The Hague Academy of International Law in January 2024. He is a member of the Institut de Droit International and of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.Photographs of the event are available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/cambridgelawfaculty/albums/72177720323668326

Speaker: Professor Orla Lynskey, University College London Abstract: The EU ‘digital empire' seeks to align technological development to its rights and values by adopting and promoting a rights-driven model of technological regulation. Bradford's influential characterisation of EU digital strategy is credible when one maps the array of legal ‘Acts' applicable to data, digital markets, digital services and AI adopted by the EU in recent years, all of which are without prejudice to the EU data protection law. Yet, when one delves deeper, the EU's commitment to rights-based regulation of the digital sphere is not iron-clad. Rather, as we demonstrate through an empirical analysis of the European Commission's adequacy decisions over a quarter of a century (1999-2024), there are clear divergences amongst EU institutions about the balance to be struck between fundamental rights and economic interests. Such divergence suggest the EU might more accurately be characterised as an amalgamation of fiefdoms rather than an empire. This inter-institutional dynamic is relevant to the legitimacy of EU actions in the digital sphere and may foreshadow the future direction of EU data law.For more information see:https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series