The causation conundrum in climate change litigation has long plagued the legal and scientific communities. This article explores the role of climate attribution theory in solving the loss and damage causation puzzle in climate change litigation. First, it describes the limitations of traditional causation theories in climate change litigation and analyzes the performance of emerging theories, such as the “substantial contribution” theory and the “market share” theory, in addressing this issue. The paper then evaluates the application of climate attribution theory in actual litigation through specific case studies and puts forward a series of policy recommendations. These include strengthening funding and support for climate attribution research, establishing a platform for interdisciplinary cooperation, developing a unified standard of proof, promoting public and judicial education, and promoting the improvement of the international legal framework. Finally, the paper points out the main problems and limitations in the application of climate attribution theory and proposes key directions for future research. The paper posits that by fostering continuous scientific research and enhancing the legal framework, climate attribution theory will assume a more prominent role in climate change litigation and facilitate the process of global climate governance.

Autism is often referred to as autism spectrum disorder that constitutes a diverse group of conditions related to brain development (which is a neurodevelopmental disorder). Autism spectrum disorder patients often have difficulty communicating and interacting socially, and are characterized by restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests that have been shown to be the same in cultures of countries around the world. However, the interpretation of symptoms and recognition in terms of policies and laws in countries are not the same. Accordingly, some countries recognize autism spectrum disorder as one of the types of disability and some countries do not, including Vietnam. Currently, Vietnam’s Law on Persons with Disabilities 2010 does not recognize the term “autism” in the Law. At the same time, there is a lack of legal issues related to the “autism spectrum” from the time of diagnosis such as policies on practical support appropriate to each individual’s needs and interests so that they can develop and be integrated in the medical field, education and enjoyment of other benefits such as persons with disabilities. This is an overlooked term that leads to the community having a misperception of “autism” when they are not aware that autism is a disease or a disability, what causes autism and why, etc. The article points out the current situation of adjustment by policies and laws on autistic people in Vietnam. On that basis, the article focuses on analyzing the contents that need to reform those policies and laws to ensure human rights of autistic people and their families.

With the vigorous development of international trade and the in-depth advancement of economic globalization, China is facing the increasingly serious problem of invasive alien species, which poses a major threat to China’s ecological environment, economic development and human health. At present, although China has a comprehensive institutional norms in the prevention and control of invasion of alien species, but in the face of the challenge of invasion of alien species, China is still facing problems such as insufficient legal basis and imperfect specific legal system. Based on this understanding, this paper discusses the prevention and control of invasive alien species legal regulation, that although in recent years China has made certain achievements in the field of prevention and control of invasive alien species, but still faces a number of problems to be solved, should promote the relevant legislative amendments, and combined with the experience of developed countries to summarize the perfect.

This study assesses Vietnam’s state-level implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) technology and analyses the government’s efforts to encourage AI implementation by focusing on the National Strategy on AI Development Program. This study emphasizes the possibility of implementing AI at the state level in Vietnam and the importance of conducting continuous reviews and enhancements to achieve sustainable and inclusive AI growth. Impact evaluations were conducted in public organizations alone, and implication evaluations were considered optional. AI impact assessments were constrained by societal norms that necessitated establishing relationships among findings. There is a lack of official information regarding the positive impact of Vietnam’s AI policy on the development of AI infrastructure, research, and talent pools. The study’s findings highlight the necessity of facilitating extensive AI legislation, and strengthening international cooperation. The study concludes with the following recommendations for improving Vietnam’s AI policy: implementing a strong AI governance structure and supporting AI education and awareness.

The principle of legality constitutes one of the basic principles of the government’s rule of law, and as a result, it has been recognized as one of the most essential guarantees of human rights. The goals of sustainable development have a strong link with the principle of legality, and achievements in accomplishing a goal can frequently contribute to the accomplishment of other goals in addition. The United Arab Emirates’ constitutional framework, regulations, and rules, along with the goals for sustainable development (SDGs), were profoundly affected by the principle of legality. The method in which international standards and laws have been integrated into the UAE’s national legal framework provides definitive proof of this effect. The research concluded that all published and unofficial legal regulations have to be respected in order for public authorities to use within the limits of the principle of legality. These involve adhering to the standards of positive legitimacy and the fundamental regulations the community agrees on.

This article advocates for a fundamental shift in England’s legal approach to professional negligence, particularly within the domains of accounting and audit. English law should move away from its intricate and unclear case law surrounding professional negligence towards a clearly defined test for professional misconduct. Drawing upon a comparative analysis with the legal framework in the United States, where auditors are not shielded from liability under the law, the article highlights the need for a more consistent and accountable legal landscape in England. One of the main aspects that necessitates change is the proximity test, as set out in the Caparo case, which currently prevents auditors from being held liable for negligence to investors (as third parties)—despite investors relying on auditors for their professional skill to audit accounts. As investors rely on audited accounts when making financial decisions, a well-defined test for professional negligence should align English law with international standards and empower victims to seek compensation from the auditors themselves and/or the auditors’ professional indemnity insurance. Such a change would enhance trust and transparency in the financial domain.