header-logo header-logo

18 January 2023
Categories: Legal News , EU , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Retained EU Bill plea from the Law Society

The Law Society issued a plea for an extension and clarity on what’s at stake this week as the controversial Retained EU Law Bill entered its final stage in the House of Commons.

It urged the government to publish an exhaustive list of every piece of legislation being revoked under the sunset clause to ensure adequate scrutiny of what might be lost. 

Under the bill, all EU-derived laws would be repealed at the close of this year unless specifically protected by the government. At stake are thousands of laws on food safety, building safety and fire prevention regulations, consumer protection, health and safety, holiday pay, maternity provision, environmental law and a wide variety of other assorted provisions. Critics of the bill have warned it would leave businesses in chaos.

The Law Society called on the government to extend the time line for reform and remove the 31 December 2023 deadline for reviewing retained law.

Spelling out the Law Society’s concerns, president Lubna Shuja said: ‘As it stands the bill would entail bypassing parliamentary scrutiny and stakeholder consultation by giving Ministers the power to independently revoke, restate, replace or update retained EU law.

‘If enacted as is, the bill could lead to different interpretations of the law by different courts and to the nations of the UK enforcing different regulations. This would not only unbalance the devolution settlements, it could also lead to legal confusion for businesses and consumers for decades to come.

‘Clause 7 takes the highly unusual step of giving powers to the Law Officers—the Attorney General, the Solicitor General and the Advocate General—to interfere in civil litigation after a case has concluded.

'This is contrary to the interests of justice and the rule of law.

‘Our members—solicitors—are particularly concerned workers could lose access to long-established rights that now form an integral part of Britain’s reputation as a fair society, such as holiday pay or protection against fire and rehire.’

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