Abstract
Positing the public-private partnership as an important optional legal structure in the delivery of infrastructural services in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), this exploratory article discusses the crucial, but formidable, problems of risks in management or governance. It considers whether traditional common law conflict of laws as applied in Singapore courts can contribute principles that recognize shared expectations and commitment or foster solidarity, mutuality, and trust—values regarded as essential to their effective resolution. Arguing that traditional conflicts distinctions between State and non-State law as well as between public and private law are unhelpful in this respect, it concludes that modern critical developments contain promising prospects for developing such principles. These principles will predicate a role for foreign State substantive public policies and, if there is relevant ‘relational distance’, implement them in BRI choice-of-law disputes, thereby reconciling private efficiency and public accountability beyond borders.
Conflict of Laws for the Age of Cybertorts: A Game-Theoretic Study of Corporate Profiteering from Choice of Law Loopholes and Interstate Torts