header-logo header-logo

06 April 2017
Issue: 7741 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Analysing the Great Repeal Bill

Influence of CJEU will “live on for some time” following Brexit

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will continue to influence British law long after Brexit has occurred, lawyers say.

The Great Repeal Bill, which is expected to be introduced in the Queen’s Speech, aims to ensure legal continuity post-Brexit by converting existing EU legislation into UK law at the time of Brexit. It will be massive in scope, with an impact on thousands of pieces of legislation affecting all walks of life and all sectors of commerce and industry from farming to digital innovation. It also removes the UK from the jurisdiction of the CJEU.

However, Trevor Tayleur, associate professor at The University of Law, said the influence of the CJEU would “live on for some time”.

“An interesting feature of the White Paper is the indication that the Bill may preserve the supremacy of pre-Brexit EU Law over pre-Brexit UK law,” he said.

“The White Paper makes it clear that if a conflict arises between two pre-Brexit laws, one EU-derived and one not, then the EU-derived one will continue to take precedence. When it comes to interpreting EU-derived UK law, decisions of the CJEU will have the same binding status as decisions of the Supreme Court.

“All courts other than the Supreme Court will remain bound by decisions of the CJEU on such issues.”

Lawyers have also called for the Great Repeal Bill to respect Parliament’s democratic role, and warned of the risk of “expediency” by the government.

Joe Egan, Law Society deputy vice president, said: “Transposing EU legislation isn’t straightforward.

“A lot of laws refer to the internal market or to EU institutions which will not be relevant post-Brexit. Also, ministers will be given powers to amend legislation to ‘take account of the negotiations as they proceed’ over the next two years.

“While we are pleased that the White Paper recognises the need to balance appropriate parliamentary scrutiny with speed in this massive undertaking, the sheer volume of law which must be incorporated leaves scope for expediency by the government. It is essential that Parliament is able to scrutinise any significant changes to laws that govern our lives.”

Issue: 7741 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll