header-logo header-logo

12 April 2017
Issue: 7742 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Market access post-Brexit

A framework to agree reciprocal market access in financial and professional services between the UK and EU post-Brexit has been developed jointly by a law firm and advisory group.

The framework would be underpinned by mutual recognition of each other’s regulatory and supervisory regimes, enabling firms to continue trading with minimal disruption to their customers. It has been developed by Hogan Lovells and the International Regulatory Strategy Group (IRSG), and is set out in a paper published this week, Mutual recognition—a basis for market access after Brexit.

The paper covers criteria for access, mechanisms for maintaining regulatory alignment and dispute resolution. It suggests basing criteria for access on existing global standards such as those set by the Basel Committee on Banking Standards. A joint UK-EU forum could be established to monitor regulation and supervision, including input into proposed new legislation. It sets out a range of dispute resolution models.

Rachel Kent, partner at Hogan Lovells, said: “Earlier this year the IRSG concluded that the focus of the government’s Brexit negotiations should be on delivering a bespoke UK-EU deal rather than reforming or adapting existing EU third country equivalence regimes for market access. This follow up report develops how a bespoke arrangement could work in practise.”

Issue: 7742 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

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