header-logo header-logo

10 May 2018
Issue: 7792 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Peers inflict pain on May’s Bill

The government has suffered its 14th defeat in the House of Lords on the Brexit Bill after Peers voted for the UK to remain in the Single Market.

Peers voted 245-218 for the cross-party amendment, brought by Labour’s Lord Ali, for the UK to negotiate continued membership of the Single Market (European Economic Area) with 83 Labour Peers defying the whip to do so.

Peers also voted in favour of a cross-party amendment to remove the 29 March 2019 departure date from the EU Withdrawal Bill. The Duke of Wellington, who proposed the amendment, said it gave the House of Commons ‘an opportunity to think again’, although he said any extension would be limited to a few weeks since the European Parliament elections take place on 23 May 2019.

The Lords backed an amendment specifying that the UK can replicate in domestic law any EU law made on or after exit day and can continue to take part in EU agencies. And they voted in favour of giving the Lords powers to refer statutory instruments back to the House of Commons.

Meanwhile, the House of Lords’ EU Justice Sub-Committee, led by Helena Kennedy QC, has issued a stark warning on the consequences of leaving the EU without effective dispute resolution systems in place.

In a report published last week, Dispute resolution and enforcement after Brexit, it warned that disagreements with the EU could be ‘potentially insoluble’ and individuals and businesses left without any ability to protect and enforce their rights. Moreover, without the jurisdiction of the CJEU, the government would have to agree multiple dispute resolution procedures.

Baroness Kennedy said: ‘We are really worried now about the lack of time.

‘This is difficult stuff, and unless both sides show real flexibility in the coming months, not only could the rights of businesses and individuals be threatened, but the whole Brexit withdrawal agreement could end up being potentially unenforceable.’

 

Issue: 7792 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
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