header-logo header-logo

Peers inflict pain on May’s Bill

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

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

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll