header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Boris Johnson’s EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
22 November 2019 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7865 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
11893
Michael Zander records what the Lords Constitution Committee had to say about the Bill
  • The report, though mainly explanatory, highlights issues requiring further consideration including Northern Ireland & workers’ rights.

‘The Bill is of the highest constitutional significance, given its intended effect. It builds on, but also amends and departs in significant ways from, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. It is a complex piece of legislation.’ (Constitution Committee Report, HL Paper 21, 5 November 2019, para.4)

That is the Bill for which Boris Johnson, having got a Commons majority on the 2nd Reading, refused to increase the time allowed for the further stages and which was then pulled to make way for the General Election on 12 December. If the Conservatives form the next government, it will presumably be re-introduced as the basis of the prime minister’s new promise ‘to get Brexit done—this time by 31 January’.

The committee’s report, though mainly explanatory, highlights issues requiring further consideration.

The status of EU law

Under the 2018

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
Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Alarm bells over Mazur
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Jury trial & a constitutional illusion
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
NLJ this week: The rise—and risks—of going private
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
NLJ this week: Human rights disputes push courts to redefine their role
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Debarment orders—shortcut or minefield?
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll