Stephen Wing-kai Chiu

The Structuring of Social Movements in Contemporary Hong Kong

cle&dquo; of the 20th century (Lau 1982, p. 1). In a recent review of the study of social conflict and collective actions in Hong Kong, Leung notes that &dquo;[a]lthough a rapidly modernizing society under colonial rule, Hong Kong has been exceptional in having been spared the frequent turmoil and instability that have plagued other countries of a similar socio-economic and political status. Since they have not been a particularly salient feature of the society, social conflict and social movements have rarely been the subject of inquiry in studies of Hong Kong&dquo; (Leung 1996, p. 159). Of course, few observers of Hong Kong politics would deny the existence of social conflict and social movements in contemporary Hong Kong. Rather, they argue that &dquo;conflicts will be confined in scale because, under normal conditions, it is extremely difficult to mobilize the Chinese people in Hong Kong to embark upon

Book review: Labor and Class Identities in Hong Kong: Class Processes in a Neoliberal Global CityLeeChun Wing, Labor and Class Identities in Hong Kong: Class Processes in a Neoliberal Global City. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016; ix + 202 pp. with appendices, notes, index, and references: 9781137517555, US

adoption of the 2010 Law on the Choice of Law for Foreign-Related Civil Relationships (hereafter the 2010 Law), the judiciary has exerted even more pressure on essential characteristics of a rule-based order – certainty, predictability and accountability – in the operationalization of the 2010 Law. In this respect, the Supreme Court of China had repealed its earlier 2007 Provisions on Certain Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases Involving Disputes over Foreign-Related Civil or Commercial Contracts in 2013 on grounds that they conflicted with the 2010 Law. The Supreme Court of China has retracted its earlier stipulations on the connecting factors for certain contracts – in the absence of choice by the contracting parties themselves to decide upon the applicable law governing their contractual relationship – and left it open to the indeterminacy of Article 41 of the 2010 Law that treats its two tests on the choice of law on an equal footing, that is, characteristic performer and closest connection. Such moves by the Supreme Court of China will inevitably affect one’s understanding of law and economics and whether China’s trajectory towards an innovation-oriented and consumption-driven society remains (or perhaps is no longer) anchored upon its globalization discourse. Although this seemingly minor intervention was omitted in this volume’s final discussion on the conflict of laws (p. 911), its manifestation was yet another example of the ever-changing nature of Chinese business law and its practice by its numerous actors. It may indeed further reflect and be an indicator of the success of the transformation of China’s economic model and the place of law in this process.