header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
08 April 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7882 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law , Covid-19
printer mail-detail

An extraordinary Act of Parliament

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
18953
Michael Zander on the Coronavirus Act 2020
  • A Government amendment allows for a Commons vote every six months as to whether the Act should continue in force.
  • Despite time constraints, both the Lords Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee and the Lords Constitution Committee had the time to produce reports.

‘Coronavirus is the most serious public health emergency that has faced the world in a century. . . To defeat it, we are proposing extraordinary measures of a kind never seen before in peacetime.’ (Secretary of State, Matt Hancock, 23 March, HoC, col 35)

The Coronavirus Act has 102 sections (72pp) and 29 Schedules (275pp)—a total of 347 pages. It was introduced in the Commons on Thursday 19 March; went through all its stages in the House of Commons on Monday 23 March; was introduced and had its 2nd Reading in the Lords on 24 March; went through its remaining stages on 25 March and received Royal Assent the same day.

Mr Hancock told the

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
Sponsored by
Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll