header-logo header-logo

09 June 2023
Categories: Legal News , EU , Brexit
printer mail-detail

LNB NEWS: Lords put amendments back to Commons on REULRR Bill

On 6 June 2023, the House of Lords debated Commons amendments to the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (REULRR Bill). 

Lexis®Library update: The government was defeated on two motions, with a majority of Lords making revised amendments to send back to the Commons. These relate to environment protection, and to Parliamentary scrutiny. Continuing the ‘ping pong’ process, consideration of the Lords amendments in the House of Commons is scheduled for 12 June 2023.

The following motions were passed by the House of Lords:

• Motion A: Commons amendment 1A to Lords amendment 1 was agreed to

• Motion B: Lords amendment 6 was not insisted on

• Motion C: The Lords did not insist on their amendment 15 but Lords amendment 15B in lieu, proposed by Lord Krebs, was agreed to. In putting amendment 15B to the Commons, the Lords are seeking to ensure that any changes to retained EU law do not dilute environmental protection or breach relevant international environmental agreements, ensure that expert advice is sought and ensure transparency by requiring the publication of an explanation of how any changes do not reduce environmental protection and how expert advice supports this

• Motion D: Commons amendment 16A was disagreed to, Commons amendment 16B was agreed to, and Lords amendment 16C in lieu of Commons amendment 16A was agreed to

• Motion E: The Lords did not insist on their amendment 42, but Lords amendment 42B in lieu, proposed by Lord Anderson, was agreed to instead. In putting amendment 42B to the Commons, the Lords are seeking to ensure that the proposed revocation or replacement of secondary retained EU law with alternative provision must first be considered by a sifting committee of the House of Commons

 To view the Lords non-insistence, disagreement, agreement and amendments in full, see: Lords Non-Insistence, Disagreement, Agreement and Amendments in Lieu

To view the Bill as amended prior to Commons consideration of the Lords amendments, see: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (as amended on Report).

To view the transcript of Lords consideration of the Commons amendments, see: Hansard, House of Lords, 6 June 2023 – Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, Consideration of Commons Amendments and Reasons

What’s next?

Consideration of the Lords message in the House of Lords is scheduled for 12 June 2023.

For Bill Tracker updates, see: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill.

Source: Hansard, House of Lords, 6 June 2023 – Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, Consideration of Commons Amendments and Reasons

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 8 June 2023 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: www.lexisnexis.co.uk

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll