header-logo header-logo

11 November 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7910 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Withdrawal (dis)agreement (Part 4)

31569
Michael Zander believes that the Government will be forced to climb down on the Internal Market Bill

In brief

  • A deal with the EU would enable the Government to drop Part V without the embarrassment of having to give in to the Lords.

As predicted, the Government was heavily defeated (twice) in Monday’s House of Lords debate on the UK Internal Market Bill—433 to 165 and 407 to 148. The two votes removed the widely criticised Part V of the Bill giving the Government the power to break international law and ousting intervention by the courts.

Governments are familiar with defeats in the House of Lords, but there are defeats and defeats. This one is different. The Commons will, of course, reject the Lords amendments. The Bill will go back to the Lords where Part V will again be voted down. So far, so fairly normal. There is no limit to the permitted number of such exchanges. So, if this ‘ping-pong’ continues, at some point the Government will have to decide whether it prefers to lose the Bill or abandon

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

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