header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
14 July 2016 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7707 / Categories: Opinion , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Act in haste…

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7707_comment

If Brexit withdrawal cannot be reversed the UK is at risk of a seriously bad outcome, explains Michael Zander QC​

The discussion about triggering withdrawal from the EU has so far concentrated mainly on the question whether it requires Parliamentary approval. Little attention has yet been given to an even more troubling question—if withdrawal is started, could it be withdrawn mid-process?

A possible reason for wanting to withdraw might be so serious a downturn in the UK’s overall economic position as to persuade the government that Brexit should not after all go ahead. A completely different reason would be realisation that the terms for withdrawal on offer from the EU were completely unacceptable, or worse, that withdrawal was about to take place without terms having been agreed.

The issue is explored by Jonathan Rickford, former legal academic and senior legal civil servant and Robert (Bob) Ayling, former legal civil servant and CEO of BA (“Brexit Referendum and Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union: A Legal Trap: the Need for Legislation”).

Once

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
NLJ this week: 40% penalty for coercive control
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
NLJ this week: Mbappé row spotlights ‘ethics bonuses’
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll