header-logo header-logo

08 August 2019
Issue: 7852 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Realities of no deal

An independent think tank has produced a ‘timely and sobering’ assessment of the difficulties of no deal, Michael Zander writes in this week’s NLJ.

Zander’s review of the Institute for Government’s report, ‘Preparing Brexit: no deal’, published on 29 July, highlights the Institute’s view that no deal is the most likely outcome given the Prime Minister’s rejection of the Irish ‘backstop’ and insistence on a 31 October deadline, and the EU’s repeated statements that it will not renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement.

Zander, Emeritus Professor of LSE, then outlines the Institute’s views on the realities of Brexit, for example, the failure to ‘roll over’ the 36 free trade agreements between the EU and non-EU countries―only 13 are complete or partially complete, while Japan, Canada and Turkey have indicated that they will not roll over the existing terms.

Free trade aside, some other agreements (notably aeroplanes and nuclear co-operation) have been rolled over, but a large number remain outstanding, and some countries have refused to continue the agreement on existing terms, for example, the US has not agreed to roll over agreements on data sharing.

Moreover, Parliament is unlikely to pass all the required Brexit Bills in time for a Halloween exit, for example, Bills on agriculture, fisheries and immigration as well as the Trade Bill. The Financial Services Bill is yet to have its Third Reading.

Zander says the absence of those would leave UK law ‘frozen’.

For more on these and other pertinent issues in the institute’s report, see 'Brexit: the endgame (Pt 2)'.

The report, ‘Preparing Brexit: No Deal’, was written by Joe Owen, Maddy Thimont Jack and Jill Rutter and is available here.

Issue: 7852 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU , Legal services
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