header-logo header-logo

15 March 2016
Issue: 7691 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Lawyers campaign for IN

Lawyers—In for Britain, a group of more than 250 pro-EU lawyers, has published a report setting out the reasons for remaining in the EU.

It argues that benefits include easier and cheaper transport and travel, more affordable energy, a cleaner and healthier environment and guaranteed access to the single market.

While acknowledging the EU “is not perfect”, it warns that misconceptions are “playing a pivotal role in the debate”, and sets out myth-busting information. On the amount of regulation from Brussels, for example, it says the House of Commons Library estimates that less than 7% of UK primary legislation and less than 15% of UK secondary legislation make direct or passing references to EU law.

Furthermore, “if the UK were to leave the EU, it is likely that most EU regulation would need to be replaced rather than repealed in order for UK goods and services to be accepted in other EU countries”.

On migration, it says the largest category of migrants come from outside the EU, and that EU nationals can be refused entry on the grounds of “public policy, public security or public health”.

It explores some alternatives to membership, but argues that the UK would need to follow EU rules to have access to the EU market, and that the EU gives automatic access to free trade deals with 50 other non-EU countries. It says that simply relying on the UK’s World Trade Organisation rights would leave UK goods subject to tariffs of between 4.5 and 15%.

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer partner John Davies, Chairman of Lawyers – In For Britain, says: “Our conclusion is that the UK is stronger, safer and better off in the EU. The words I hear the most from those who are undecided are ‘give us the facts’.  We have gathered together what we believe are the most reliable facts that led us to this conclusion.”

Davies and the other members of the group are campaigning as individuals not as representatives of their law firms, nearly all of whom maintain a neutral stance on the issue.

Issue: 7691 / Categories: Legal News
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