header-logo header-logo

Analysing the Great Repeal Bill

06 April 2017
Issue: 7741 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Influence of CJEU will “live on for some time” following Brexit

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will continue to influence British law long after Brexit has occurred, lawyers say.

The Great Repeal Bill, which is expected to be introduced in the Queen’s Speech, aims to ensure legal continuity post-Brexit by converting existing EU legislation into UK law at the time of Brexit. It will be massive in scope, with an impact on thousands of pieces of legislation affecting all walks of life and all sectors of commerce and industry from farming to digital innovation. It also removes the UK from the jurisdiction of the CJEU.

However, Trevor Tayleur, associate professor at The University of Law, said the influence of the CJEU would “live on for some time”.

“An interesting feature of the White Paper is the indication that the Bill may preserve the supremacy of pre-Brexit EU Law over pre-Brexit UK law,” he said.

“The White Paper makes it clear that if a conflict arises between two pre-Brexit laws, one EU-derived and one not, then the EU-derived one will continue to take precedence. When it comes to interpreting EU-derived UK law, decisions of the CJEU will have the same binding status as decisions of the Supreme Court.

“All courts other than the Supreme Court will remain bound by decisions of the CJEU on such issues.”

Lawyers have also called for the Great Repeal Bill to respect Parliament’s democratic role, and warned of the risk of “expediency” by the government.

Joe Egan, Law Society deputy vice president, said: “Transposing EU legislation isn’t straightforward.

“A lot of laws refer to the internal market or to EU institutions which will not be relevant post-Brexit. Also, ministers will be given powers to amend legislation to ‘take account of the negotiations as they proceed’ over the next two years.

“While we are pleased that the White Paper recognises the need to balance appropriate parliamentary scrutiny with speed in this massive undertaking, the sheer volume of law which must be incorporated leaves scope for expediency by the government. It is essential that Parliament is able to scrutinise any significant changes to laws that govern our lives.”

Issue: 7741 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll