Public Lectures from the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge

Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge

The Faculty of Law has a thriving calendar of lectures and seminars spanning the entire gamut of legal, political and philosophical topics. Regular programmes are run by many of the Faculty's Research Centres, and a number of high-profile speakers who are leaders in their fields often speak at the Faculty on other occasions as well. Audio recordings from such events are published in our various podcast collections. Video recordings are available via YouTube.

  1. 19H AGO

    Norway’s Patchwork of Agreements with the EU: Challenges to ‘the Norway Model’ brought about by the EU’s Strategic Rethink of the Internal Market: CELS Lunchtime Seminar

    Speaker: Professor Halvard Haukeland Fredriksen, UIB, Norway Biography: Halvard Haukeland Fredriksen is professor of European law at the University of Bergen, Norway. Besides his Norwegian law degree, he holds the degrees of Mag.Jur. and Dr.Jur. from the University of Göttingen (Germany) as well as a PhD from the University of Bergen. Member of the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters. Co-Director of the Bergen Centre of the Europeanization of Norwegian law. Editor-in-chief of the Norwegian Law Journal. Member of the 2022-2024 ‘EEA Review Committee’ that assed Norway’s current affiliation to the European Union. Abstract: For more than three decades, the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) has integrated Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway into the better part of the EU internal market. Over the years, the Agreement has been supplemented by numerous other agreements between Norway and the EU, creating a complex patchwork of agreements commonly referred to as ‘the Norway model’. Notwithstanding the model’s democratic problems, the general view in Norway is that it has worked well as a compromise between those in favour of membership of the Union and those very much opposed to this idea. However, the EU’s strive for ‘strategic autonomy’ in the current geopolitical situation makes it more complicated to remain part of the internal market without being part of the customs union and the common commercial policy. The seminar will discuss the legal challenges confronting ‘the Norway model’ as well as possible remedies. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

    34 min
  2. 5D AGO

    Due Diligence at a Crossroads: The Old Road, the New Road, and the Bridge Between

    Speaker: Dr Penelope Ridings, International Law Commission Lecture summary: In the last several decades, scholarly views of due diligence in international law have shifted from due diligence as a primary obligation under customary international law, to due diligence as a standard of conduct attached to a primary obligation. Thus, for example, due diligence is required to meet a State’s obligation of protection (of the environment) or of prevention (of genocide). The International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion on Climate Change adopted such an articulation and stated that due diligence is a standard of conduct and States have a duty to prevent significant harm to the environment by acting with due diligence. The Court not only reinforced the importance of the customary international law obligation not to cause significant harm to the environment but placed this within the ‘no harm’ principle, as expressed in the Corfu Channel case. However, the Court did not expressly articulate whether there was a broader obligation of due diligence that applies not only to the prevention of environmental harm, but also to the prevention of other harms to the rights and interests of States. Due diligence is thus as a crossroads. Has the ICJ essentially sought to bridge the gap between on the one hand the notion of due diligence as an obligation on a State not to permit activities subject to its jurisdiction or control which causes harm to the rights and interests of other States, and on the other hand the notion of due diligence as a standard of conduct attached to a primary obligation? Has the Court opened the door to finding a general customary international law obligation not to cause harm to the rights and interests of other States? Or has it confined due diligence to its status as a standard of conduct attached to a primary obligation? This lecture will discuss this pivotal point which is central to the elucidation of the foundation and scope of the due diligence obligation under international law. Dr Penelope Ridings is a Member of the International Law Commission and New Zealand Barrister practising in the field of public international law. In 2025 she was appointed the ILC Special Rapporteur for the topic ‘Due Diligence in International Law’. She was formerly New Zealand’s Chief International Legal Adviser in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and a New Zealand diplomat. She was Agent for New Zealand before the International Court of Justice in Whaling in the Antarctic: Australia v Japan, New Zealand Intervening and before the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea in the Request for an Advisory Opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission. After moving to the New Zealand Bar, she has advised governments and international organisations on public international law including law of the sea, fisheries, environmental law, trade and investment, international security and international dispute settlement. She was Chair of the 2025 arbitration under the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (UK-Sandeel) and Chair of the WTO appeal arbitration China – Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights under the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement. She has served on several ICSID ad hoc Annulment Committees, including as Chair, and as an independent panellist in disputes before the WTO. She has lectured in international law and contributed to several books and written articles on various aspects of international law. This lecture was delivered on 13 February 2026 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series.

    39 min
  3. 5D AGO

    A Technology Perspective on Intellectual Property: CIPIL Evening Seminar

    Speaker: Dr Svitlana Lebedenko, Assistant Professor at the University of Warwick and part-time Assistant Professor at the European University Institute. Biography: Dr Svitlana Lebedenko specialises in innovation and industrial policy, law and technology, and intellectual property law. She is currently an Assistant Professor in the School of Law at the University of Warwick and a part-time Assistant Professor at the European University Institute, contributing to the Global Governance Programme of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. Previously, she was a Hauser Global Fellow at New York University School of Law's Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy, a Max Weber Fellow at the European University Institute, a Research Fellow at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, and a Visiting Research Fellow at the University of Copenhagen's Center for Advanced Studies in Bioscience Innovation Law. Her first book, Russian Innovation and Intellectual Property: From Communism to Capitalism, is forthcoming with Cambridge University Press in 2026. Abstract: Intellectual property has mainly been studied from the institutional and systems perspectives. While both have produced useful insights, neither really explains the spread of intellectual property, which, despite its numerous institutional failures, has never been rolled back. The talk introduces a technology perspective on intellectual property to provide a macro-level explanation of this phenomenon of resilience. Two propositions arise from conceptualising intellectual property as a technology. First, the efficiency and neutrality theses of technology serve as intellectual property anchors. Second, the evolutionary nature of technology means that changes to the tools of knowledge governance that may occur are likely to be bound by the limits of the dominant technological (intellectual property) paradigm. The talk will conclude by considering the descriptive and normative value of this technology perspective. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

    27 min
  4. FEB 10

    Artificial Intelligence and the future of financial stability: regulatory and supervisory gaps in the UK framework: 3CL Seminar

    Speaker: Dr Clara Martins Pereira (Associate Professor of Financial Law, University of Durham) Abstract: The increasing use of AI in finance is predicted to have mixed impact on financial stability: while AI can be used to help financial institutions and supervisors identify, manage, and monitor systemic risk, it can also increase the frequency and severity of crises by exacerbating existing vulnerability channels. Under the UK’s technology-agnostic approach to AI, algorithmic technologies are primarily governed through existing sectoral frameworks rather than bespoke regulation. I argue that this approach might be insufficient to mitigate their negative impact on financial stability. The features that separate AI from other technologies—opacity, autonomy, and adaptability—make existing regulatory frameworks and architectures a poor fit for tackling the financial systemic risk created by AI. Disclosure rules are undermined by ‘black box’ opacity and the unpredictability of autonomous algorithm-algorithm interactions, while ex-ante testing struggles to predict endogenous risks arising from those interactions and their systemic impact. Crucially, model risk management and operational resilience frameworks, often calibrated for acute disruptions and focused on individual firms, are ill-equipped to ensure systemic resilience when AI models drift in similar ways. The article concludes that mitigating the risks of AI for financial stability calls for a purposeful change towards specialised algorithmic governance rules, and a review of supervision and enforcement practices. Dr Clara Martins Pereira is Associate Professor of Financial Law and Director for International Development at Durham Law School, Invited Professor at Católica Lisbon School of Law, and Global Associate Professor of Law at the University of Notre Dame. Her research focuses on financial law and regulation, technological innovation, and sustainable development. Clara holds a DPhil, MPhil, and Magister Juris from the University of Oxford, as well as an MSc in Law and Business and an LLB from Católica Lisbon. She has held academic roles at King’s College London, the University of Oxford, and the LSE, and served as a Visiting Scholar at Columbia Law School, Sapienza University of Rome, and the Max Planck Institute, among others. Formerly a capital markets lawyer at PLMJ, she has also acted as a consultant for organisations such as the World Bank and ICF. 3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners. For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website: http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

    38 min
  5. FEB 9

    The Systemic Function of General Principles

    Speakers: Prof Mads Andenas & Prof Johann Ruben Leiss, University of Oslo Lecture summary: The lecture explores the systemic function of general principles in international law in light of the ongoing work of the ILC on general principles of law and recent practice of international courts and tribunals, such as the Climate Change Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice from 2025. In its first part, the lecture examines the ILC’s approach to the systemic function of general principles and comments of states on the ILC’s work. In its second and third part, the lecture discusses the two main features of the systemic function of general principles, namely their contribution to inter-norm and inter-systemic coherence in international law. All general principles potentially fulfil a systemic function by their gap-filling role and inter-systemic communication through Article 38(1)(c) ICJ Statute. Several general principles have a systemic pull in inter-norm contexts as interpretative guidelines and inter-norm harmonisers and coordinators. In the relationship between different (sub)orders of international law (including European law and national legal orders applying international law), several principles provide for ‘hinge’ mechanisms and inter-system harmonisers which open legal (sub)orders to one another, and integrate them into (relative) unity, while others serve as inter-system coordinators or mechanisms for conditional closure of legal orders. This means, all general principles have a systemic function, whereas certain principles have more direct systemic function by virtue of their normative content. Through their systemic function, general principles contribute as a central cohesive force furthering international law’s character as a legal and (relative) unitary system. This system is characterized by a complex and dynamic interplay between a plurality of legal norms, orders, and sub-orders, including national legal orders, through systemic principles of openness, coordination, and conditional closure. Chair: Prof Campbell McLachlan This lecture was given on 6 February 2026 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series at the Lauterpacht Centre.

    34 min
  6. FEB 6

    Property Framework and Copyright Maximalism: CIPIL Evening Seminar

    Speaker: Dr Poorna Mysoor, CIPIL, University of Cambridge Biography: Dr Poorna Mysoor is a Fellow in Law at Lucy Cavendish College, University of Cambridge. She was a Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellow at Oxford Law Faculty. She is the author of two books, Copyright as Personal Property (2025) and Implied Licences in Copyright Law (2021), both published with Oxford University Press, and of other peer reviewed journals articles. Poorna obtained her undergraduate law degree at NLSIU, Bangalore, LLM from SOAS, University of London and DPhil from Oxford Law Faculty. Before embarking on her doctorate, Poorna practised intellectual property law for several years in Hong Kong and was a litigator in India. Abstract: Many scholars argue that recognising copyright as a property right leads to expansion. The argument is that property rights empower the owners disproportionately with little regard to the interests of other stakeholders. In this presentation the speaker seeks not only to debunk this argument to show instead the limiting role played by property rights and its impact on copyright. Drawing from her recently published monograph, ‘Copyright as Personal Property’ the speaker will put forward relevant analogies from land law and personal property law in support of her arguments. She seeks to demonstrate tat copyright expansion can indeed be reined in by adopting, and not disregarding, the property framework in the characterisation of copyright. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

    38 min
  7. FEB 4

    Chilling Effects: Repression, Conformity, and Power in the Digital Age: CIPIL/CPL Lunchtime Seminar

    Speaker: Professor Jon Penney (Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto) In this talk, Jon Penney explores key themes from his new book Chilling Effects: Repression, Conformity, and Power in the Digital Age (Cambridge University Press, 2025), which examines the increasing weaponization of surveillance, censorship, and new technology to repress and control us. With corporations, governments, and extremists employing big data, artificial intelligence, FRT, cyber-mobs, and other technological threats to limit our rights and freedoms, concerns about chilling effects—or how these activities deter us from exercising our rights—have become urgent. Penney draws on law, privacy theory, and social science to present a new conformity theory that highlights the dangers of chilling effects and their potential to erode democracy and enable a more illiberal future. Following the book’s urgent and timely message, he sheds light on the repressive and conforming effects of technology, state, and corporate power and offers a roadmap of how to respond to their weaponization today and tomorrow. Biography: Jon Penney is a legal scholar and social scientist at Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto, where he is an Associate Professor and holds the York Research Chair in Artificial Intelligence, Data Governance, and the Law. He is also a Faculty Associate at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society and Senior Research Fellow at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab. His award-winning research on privacy, technology, and human rights has received national and international attention, including coverage in the Washington Post, the New York Times, Reuters International, The Guardian, and Le Monde, among others, and has been profiled in WIRED and Harvard Magazine. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/

    41 min
  8. FEB 3

    Should we care about GDPR Article 22?: CIPIL Evening Seminar

    Speaker: Tim Pitt-Payne KC, 11 Kings Bench Walk Biography: Timothy Pitt-Payne KC is a leading information law silk based at 11KBW where he has practiced since 1990. He was appointed QC/KC in 2010. His information law practice involves both litigation and advisory work in data protection, freedom of information, access to environmental information, RIPA, human rights issues, privacy, and breach of confidence. His clients have included commercial organisations, the Information Commissioner, numerous regulators, NHS bodies, local authorities, Universities, and private individuals. He has extensive advocacy experience in information law, at all levels from the First-tier Tribunal to the Supreme Court. In addition to information law, he is also active in both public law and employment law. Abstract: Article 22 of the UK GDPR prohibits certain forms of decision-making based solely on automated processing of personal data. This presentation considers the significance, scope, meaning and justification of Article 22 (as recently amended by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025). It argues that the provision should remain as part of the UK GDPR, although its scope may require modification. The provision is an outlier within the UK GDPR, in that it is focused specifically on decision-making, rather than on the full range of ways in which personal data can be processed. It applies to decision-makers in both the public and private sector. Much of the debate about the implications of automated decision-making has been focused on decision-making by judges or by public authorities; Article 22 is much wider in scope, with extensive impact on the private sector. I address some of the interpretative difficulties raised by Article 22. For instance, what minimum level of human involvement is required by Article 22? To what extent are any interpretative difficulties resolved by the recent amendments? In relation to the justification for Article 22, I assess possible arguments based on transparency, bias, responsiveness to individual circumstances, and risks of error. I argue that the most convincing justification is based on non-consequentialist arguments broadly relating to human dignity, founded on claims about inherent differences between human and machine capabilities. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

    41 min

Ratings & Reviews

3.4
out of 5
5 Ratings

About

The Faculty of Law has a thriving calendar of lectures and seminars spanning the entire gamut of legal, political and philosophical topics. Regular programmes are run by many of the Faculty's Research Centres, and a number of high-profile speakers who are leaders in their fields often speak at the Faculty on other occasions as well. Audio recordings from such events are published in our various podcast collections. Video recordings are available via YouTube.

More From Cambridge University

You Might Also Like