header-logo header-logo

05 September 2019 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7854 / Categories: Opinion , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Brexit: The rebels’ Bill to defeat no-deal

Michael Zander QC explains the current state of affairs playing out in Parliament

Tuesday’s government defeat in the House of Commons by 328 votes to 301 cleared the way for the rebels’ European Union (Withdrawal) (No 6) Bill to be rushed through all its stages before the end of the week. The purpose of the Bill is to prevent a no-deal exit from the EU, though whether it would do that is not clear.

The Bill states that unless a deal is reached with the EU or Parliament approves a no-deal Brexit by October 19, the government would be required to write to the EU seeking an extension to the Art 50 period until 31 January 2020.

The Bill indicates the wording of the letter that the prime minister would be required to send to the EU, with the proviso that if the European Council agrees to an extension to 31 January 2020, the prime minister would immediately have to accept that extension. If the European Council agreed an extension to any other date, the prime minister

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll