header-logo header-logo

09 June 2023
Categories: Legal News , EU , Brexit
printer mail-detail

LNB NEWS: Lords put amendments back to Commons on REULRR Bill

On 6 June 2023, the House of Lords debated Commons amendments to the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (REULRR Bill). 

Lexis®Library update: The government was defeated on two motions, with a majority of Lords making revised amendments to send back to the Commons. These relate to environment protection, and to Parliamentary scrutiny. Continuing the ‘ping pong’ process, consideration of the Lords amendments in the House of Commons is scheduled for 12 June 2023.

The following motions were passed by the House of Lords:

• Motion A: Commons amendment 1A to Lords amendment 1 was agreed to

• Motion B: Lords amendment 6 was not insisted on

• Motion C: The Lords did not insist on their amendment 15 but Lords amendment 15B in lieu, proposed by Lord Krebs, was agreed to. In putting amendment 15B to the Commons, the Lords are seeking to ensure that any changes to retained EU law do not dilute environmental protection or breach relevant international environmental agreements, ensure that expert advice is sought and ensure transparency by requiring the publication of an explanation of how any changes do not reduce environmental protection and how expert advice supports this

• Motion D: Commons amendment 16A was disagreed to, Commons amendment 16B was agreed to, and Lords amendment 16C in lieu of Commons amendment 16A was agreed to

• Motion E: The Lords did not insist on their amendment 42, but Lords amendment 42B in lieu, proposed by Lord Anderson, was agreed to instead. In putting amendment 42B to the Commons, the Lords are seeking to ensure that the proposed revocation or replacement of secondary retained EU law with alternative provision must first be considered by a sifting committee of the House of Commons

 To view the Lords non-insistence, disagreement, agreement and amendments in full, see: Lords Non-Insistence, Disagreement, Agreement and Amendments in Lieu

To view the Bill as amended prior to Commons consideration of the Lords amendments, see: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (as amended on Report).

To view the transcript of Lords consideration of the Commons amendments, see: Hansard, House of Lords, 6 June 2023 – Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, Consideration of Commons Amendments and Reasons

What’s next?

Consideration of the Lords message in the House of Lords is scheduled for 12 June 2023.

For Bill Tracker updates, see: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill.

Source: Hansard, House of Lords, 6 June 2023 – Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, Consideration of Commons Amendments and Reasons

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 8 June 2023 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: www.lexisnexis.co.uk

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll