‘The EU’s highest court has been asked to rule on whether British nationals should be able to keep their EU citizenship after Brexit, in a major upset that could send negotiations between Brussels and the UK into chaos.’
The Independent, 7th February 2018
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The previous blog post drew attention to the way in which the scope of rights protected in the UK may be diminished post Brexit if the Charter is not retained as part of domestic law. The second reason for retaining the Charter draws attention to the remedy provided when rights are breached. Individuals relying on the Charter at the moment can use the Charter to disapply legislation which breaches Charter rights. This is a legally binding remedy which invalidates the relevant legislation. This is not the case for those relying on common law rights, or their Convention rights under the Human Rights Act.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 4th February 2018
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘This series of short blog posts will argue that there are four main reasons for allowing the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights to continue to have domestic effect in UK law. First, it provides a broader scope of rights than either the ECHR or the common law. Second, it provides a better remedy for a breach of rights. Third, to retain the Charter provides greater clarity as to the extent to which human rights are protected in the UK. Fourth, the Charter provides for a protection of rights that has more democratic credentials than either the common (judge-made) law, or the ECHR. The final blog post will explain why the Government’s main argument against retention of the Charter – that it only applies within the scope of EU law – does not provide a justification for removing the Charter from domestic law.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 2nd February 2018
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘The terms of the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union remain vague and fluid at the time of writing. However, it is clear that the prospect has given rise to concern as to the future shape and effectiveness of environmental law following Brexit. EU environmental law, as it has evolved and expanded since the early 1970s, has exerted a profound influence over the law of the United Kingdom, and has in many areas resulted in entrenched environmental problems being tackled and environmental standards being improved.’
39 Essex Chambers, January 2018
Source: www.39essex.com
‘The government’s main piece of legislation on withdrawal from the European Union has cleared its first hurdle in the House of Lords.’
OUT-LAW.com, 1st February 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The UK government’s desire to keep planned post-Brexit customs and tax legislation as wide as possible risks creating “unnecessary uncertainty” for businesses, tax experts have warned.’
OUT-LAW.com, 29th January 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Proposed legislation bringing existing EU law into UK law is “fundamentally flawed” and needs to be reworked, a Lords committee has said.’
BBC News, 29th January 2018
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In December 2017, the principles of Britain’s divorce from the European Union were agreed, and we now move to what Theresa May has called the “implementation phase”. But, as Professor Catherine Barnard of Cambridge University tells Bonnie Soames, it should really be termed “the transition”.’
Law Pod UK, 17th January 2018
Source: audioboom.com
‘A battle cry of the Brexiteers during the referendum campaign was a rousing appeal to restore the supremacy of Parliament: to free our great nation from its subservience to EU law. There is therefore a dispiriting irony that the process of withdrawal that is proposed in the EU Withdrawal Bill will lead to a hollowing out of the authority of Parliament[1]. On an unprecedented scale, it is proposed that Parliament will divest itself of powers in its traditional sphere of authority – that of legislating pursuant to the mandate granted by the electorate – and transfer such powers to the Executive. At the same time, there will be a sapping of Parliamentary power to the Judiciary, who will be required to adjudicate on issues of policy that would be expected to have been determined by the sovereign Parliament, unless some clear interpretative guidance is provided in the approach to be adopted to policy issues that will inevitably arise.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 15th January 2018
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The British government may have breached a major “environmental democracy” law by failing to consult the public when drawing up Brexit legislation.’
The Guardian, 9th January 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Recent press reports have suggested that competition lawyers in other Member States have been confidently predicting the death of cartel claims in the UK following Brexit. But reports of the demise of this species of litigation are premature. The European Communities Act 1972 (the ECA 1972) will be repealed following the entry into force of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill (the Bill). But this is unlikely to have any significant impact on the ability of claimants to bring claims before UK courts for damages caused by infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) – at least for quite some time. The reason for this is the provisions of the Bill that protect rights that have accrued prior to “exit day”.’
Blackstone Chambers, 4th December 2017
Source: www.blackstonechambers.com
‘The lack of adequate Parliamentary scrutiny when the UK negotiates trade agreements (something it has not done in its own right for many years) has come to the attention of the House of Commons International Trade Committee. This is timely given the prospect of the UK negotiating the single most important trade agreement it is likely to negotiate for a long time – its future trade agreement with the EU. The context for the Committee’s concern is its inquiry into the Trade Bill. One of the issues which the Bill addresses is the domestic implementation in the UK of those EU trade agreements which are adapted for continued application by the UK after Brexit. The Committee has asked whether Parliamentary scrutiny of ministerial rules implementing these agreements is adequate, and, more broadly, whether scrutiny of the UK signing up to these and other trade agreements, is adequate.’
Brexit Law, 6th December 2017
Source: brexit.law
‘Speech by Sir Geoffrey Vos, Chancellor of the High Court: The Future for the UK’s jurisdiction and English law after Brexit.’
Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 30th November 2017
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
‘The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) has warned UK financial firms that they should not rely on leniency from local regulators in the EU if the UK exits the trading bloc without a deal on the cross-border provision of financial services provision in place.’
OUT-LAW.com, 28th November 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Earlier in the year, I posted on the importance of Parliament legislating to provide a new ‘constitutional instruction’ to national courts to replace that currently set out in the European Communities Act 1972 (ECA) and offer clear guidance on judicial interpretation post-Brexit (see here). The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill provides domestic courts with that instruction as part of its effort to prepare the UK legal order for the challenges of leaving the European Union. This second post reviews the terms of that instruction and reflects on the scope that it would afford national courts to shape the development of domestic law post-Brexit.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 27th November 2017
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Faced with a cliff, jumping is generally considered one of the least pleasant solutions. Yet we are racing towards the edge of the Brexit cliff. Miracles excluded, the UK and EU will not be able to finalize the necessary Brexit agreements in time. Effectively, there is less than a year left, and we have not even moved beyond the Brexit bill. As an extension of the two-year term seems politically impossible in the UK, we seem left with one unlikely and one disastrous possible outcome.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 24th November 2017
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Ministers are considering how to amend UK law to recognise animal sentience after Brexit, Michael Gove says.’
BBC News, 23rd November 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The legal press has mostly viewed Benkharbouche v SOS for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2017] UKSC 62 in the Supreme Court [“SC”] as a case which simply addresses the interplay between State Immunity and the Employment Tribunals. But, the other significance to this case is that it contains commentary the on the supremacy of EU Law, the role and significance of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (“CFREU”) and the way in which it confers a free standing route to dis-applying primary legislation as well as raising questions on the impact of Brexit. It follows that it is essential reading for employment lawyers. Jacques Algazy QC analyses these issues in this blog.’
Cloisters, 2nd November 2017
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘The legal implications of leaving the EU have not been thought through, could overwhelm the supreme court and endanger the independence of the British judiciary, four senior retired judges have warned.’
The Guardian, 21st November 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024