header-logo header-logo

Brexit: a cautionary tale for divorcing couples?

06 October 2019 / Graeme Fraser
Issue: 7859 / Categories: Features , Family , Brexit
printer mail-detail
Brexit is not divorce writ large but there are some parallels when it comes to brinkmanship & punishment, says Graeme Fraser
  • Like Brexit, divorce has traditionally been framed in similarly adversarial and belligerent terms and this has also led to counterproductive behaviours.

Brexit has been characterised as a divorce so often that it has become a cliché. Two parties are ending their formal relationship, with emotions running high and a financial settlement looming large. However, Brexit and divorce are not quite as similar as they might appear. 

Brexit is vastly more complicated than divorce. Divorce involves two individuals, while Brexit involves a supra-national organisation, 28 culturally-diverse states and a combined population of over half a billion people with wide-ranging viewpoints. International and domestic politics come into play in Brexit with no equivalence in divorce. The EU are concerned to discourage other member states from following the UK’s lead and must consider the Good Friday Agreement. Meanwhile, the UK Government must ensure any deal is approved by Parliament.

Brexit

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll