header-logo header-logo

05 September 2019
Issue: 7854 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Chaos & confusion reign in Westminster

Fears of a no-deal Brexit mounted this week during a tumultuous session in Parliament. 

The prime minister lost his majority and his first vote as backbench MPs seized control of the order paper and introduced the European Union (Withdrawal) (No 6) Bill.

Michael Zander QC, Emeritus Professor, LSE, said: ‘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 prime minister will opt for an election rather than ask for a Brexit extension, if the Bill passes, but needs the agreement of two-thirds of MPs to do so.

Writing in NLJ this week, Zander said: ‘At the time of writing there was a further question—would the Bill have Queen’s Consent? This is required for any bill that affects the royal prerogative. Queen’s Consent is required to be signified after the third reading in the House of Commons. It is given by a minister after authority has been obtained from the Queen on application by a Privy Counsellor.’

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