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“if the UK were to leave the EU, it is likely that most EU regulation would need to be replaced rather than repealed in order for UK goods and services to be accepted in other EU countries”.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

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