‘Family analysis: Analysing a case where the Family Court submitted a ‘highly unusual’ request under Article 15 of Brussels II bis to the Spanish court for it to transfer jurisdiction to the courts of England and Wales, Chris Stevenson, barrister at Fourteen, questions how such cases will be approached in a post-Brexit world.’
Family Law, 17th November 2017
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Since joining the EU, the free movement of people throughout Europe has led to an increase in international families in the UK, with more marriages involving people of different nationalities and from different cultures than ever before. The large number of international families in the UK could mean social, economic and legal complexities post-Brexit, with studies already showing that Brexit is causing friction within families.’
Family Law, 1st November 2017
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The UK government has reiterated its plans to establish an agreement with the remainder of the EU member states that will allow personal data to flow across borders unhindered post-Brexit.’
OUT-LAW.com, 30th October 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Last week, Lord Sumption delivered the majority decision of the Supreme Court on Benkharbouche v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Libya v Janah. The case would have been heard in December of last year, but for the small matter of Miller, which caused the hearing to be moved to June of this year. Brexit and Miller, however, do not only seem to have affected the timing of the hearing. They have also affected its importance. What might have been originally anticipated as a potentially defining moment – where the Supreme Court confirmed that the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms could be used as a stand-alone cause of action to disapply primary legislation and explained how this could be achieved – was translated into an almost blasé statement by the court that ‘a conflict between EU law and English domestic law must be resolved in favour of the former, with the latter being disapplied; whereas the remedy in the case of inconsistency with Article 6 of the Human Rights Convention is a declaration of incompatibility.’ What might once have seemed controversial has become run of the mill. What has led to the casual acceptance of ‘disapplication’ of a UK statute; and what will happen to disapplication – and the Charter – post-Brexit?’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 24th October 2017
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Will the UK need to keep an eye on ECJ rulings after withdrawal? Rhodri Thompson QC examines the practical and political difficulties.’
Counsel, October 2017
Source: www.counselmagazine.co.uk
‘Human rights took centre-stage – alongside a healthy dose of politics – at a discussion between Shadow Minister for Brexit Sir Keir Starmer and the BBC’s Jo Coburn this week.’
RightsInfo, 19th October 2017
Source: rightsinfo.org
‘Ominous clouds are gathering and the terrain underfoot increasingly resembles a quagmire on the Brexiteers’ ‘sunlit uplands’. The latest reminders that the reality will be significantly different from their utopia of a prosperous global Buccaneering Britain has come in the form of a trade dispute between the U.S. and a Canadian aircraft manufacturer which could have a devastating impact on the Northern-Irish economy where the manufacturer has a significant base; and the threat from a gang of countries that they will not accept a proposed agreement (one of the few agreements for now) between the EU and UK as to the divvying up of agricultural import quotas after Brexit. Perhaps most galling on this front is the fact that the gang involves those with whom it was hoped trade deals would be swiftly struck; including the U.S. and New Zealand.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 10th October 2017
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The chief executive of the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), Andrew Bailey, has called for close cooperation between regulatory bodies to ensure continuity of service for financial institutions after Brexit.’
OUT-LAW.com, 2nd October 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘A House of Lords committee is to examine the legal basis for, and potential costs to the UK of, a time-limited Brexit transitional period.’
OUT-LAW.com, 28th September 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Resolving the complexities of family life across international borders is notoriously complex. However, with Britain’s impending withdrawal from the EU casting an unexpected shadow over the certainty of established legislation, children and their families face an additional layer of difficulty as Britain attempts to untangle itself from existing EU regulations. To manage increasing anxiety, the Government has recently published its vision of the UK’s future partnership with the EU on this key issue entitled “Providing a cross-border civil judicial cooperation framework”. What does this tell us about how international children law disputes will be decided post-Brexit? Are we any clearer as to what impact this will have on the children caught up in these disputes?’
Family Law, 14th September 2017
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The leaked Home Office document on Britain’s post-Brexit immigration policy spells out for the first time how ending the jurisdiction of the European court of justice will weaken family reunion rights for EU nationals in Britain.’
The Guardian, 6th September 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Part-time and agency workers and those facing redundancy are already targeted by bosses – and the EU withdrawal bill could make them more vulnerable.’
The Guardian, 3rd September 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Data protection lawyers and specialists have long been used to their area of expertise being treated as a rather mould-infested and irritating area of the law, like champerty but with more Schedules. Amongst other things, Brexit seems to have caused a bit of an upsurge in interest in how cross-border data flows are going to be managed in the brave new world. (Panopticon has seen articles in the last few months mentioning the GDPR and data protection after Brexit in the LRB and Private Eye, which is a bit like unexpectedly finding your girlfriend on page 3 of the Sun and the New Left Review on the same day.) HM Government have also recognised the importance of the issue, and have today published their position paper entitled ‘The exchange and protection of personal data’.It is fair to say that the 15 pages that you print off are not ram-packed (to use Mr Corbyn’s famed train-based term) with unexpected surprises, or indeed a huge amount of detail. There will doubtless be complaints about this, but to be fair, what the UK would like from the EU in the data protection is hardly rocket science. It spends a good deal of space explaining the importance of ensuring good levels of data protection, and enabling cross-border data flows, whilst also making quite an effort to emphasise how keen the UK has been, and still is, on being at the forefront of data protection. It even suggests that the DPA 1998 implemented the Directive beyond the minimum required; perfectly fairly it points out that the DPA didn’t have to cover law enforcement data processing but chose to do so, and surely our European friends will not be so impolite as to note, for example, the need for the Court of Appeal to strike down bits of the DPA as not properly implementing the Directive in Vidal-Hall…’
Panopticon, 24th August 2017
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘Amid much media speculation, the Government has published its position paper on post-Brexit relations between the UK and the Court of Justice of the European Union.’
Law & Religion UK, 23rd August 2017
Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com
‘Parents in the UK would find it “much more difficult” to recover abducted children if Britain fails to persuade the EU to continue legal cooperation after Brexit, according to government officials detailing their latest plans.’
The Guardian, 22nd August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Justice minister Dominic Raab has conceded the UK would keep “half an eye” on rulings by the European Union’s highest court after Brexit as the government appeared to soften its stance on how heavily the bloc would influence UK law.’
The Guardian, 23rd August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Britain will be subject to the rulings of European courts after Brexit, the government has conceded, in an apparent climbdown from its promise of judicial independence.’
The Guardian, 21st August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Theresa May’s Brexit strategy has been thrown into new doubt as a former head of the government’s legal services ridicules the prime minister’s claim that the UK can break free of all European laws while continuing to reap the economic benefits of the EU’s single market.’
The Guardian, 19th August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024