header-logo header-logo

Brexit behind the headlines

08 September 2017
Issue: 7760 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-detail
nlj_7760_greene_0

Position papers restate mantra that CJEU will have no direct jurisdiction post Brexit

The government’s latest position papers on Brexit hint at retaining the status quo, according to Brexit commentator David Greene.

Press headlines suggested a ‘climbdown’ on the government’s position that the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Communities (CJEU) would end upon Brexit, following the publication in August of the UK’s position papers: ‘Providing a cross-border civil judicial co-operation framework’ and ‘Enforcement and dispute resolution’.

Writing this week, however, Greene, NLJ consultant editor, says: ‘Have they forced a government climbdown? Not quite: both papers restate the mantra that upon withdrawal the CJEU will no longer have direct jurisdiction in the UK.

‘That keeps the politicians happy, but, subject to that point, both papers smack of retaining, as far as possible, the status quo in the longer term.’

Greene says Brexit will have an impact at three main levels—government level, investor level and at the level of day to day business and citizens’ rights.

At government level, the UK position has been that the CJEU will have no continuing role although its pre-Brexit rulings will have binding effect. The EU’s position is that the CJEU must have a continuing role in the process as a result of the EU Treaties. However, ‘the new UK paper now talks of the possibility of voluntary references to the CJEU for interpretation only,’ says Greene. ‘It rejects the idea that the CJEU should be entitled to impose any remedies.’

On the rights of investors, whether small businesses or multinationals, Greene says ‘the likelihood is that they will be the subject of an ICSD arbitration process.

‘These arbitration processes remain highly contentious and bearing in mind the level of trade would need to be very well resourced, the UK does not foresee any role for the CJEU in that area. The EU position is unclear but the role of the CJEU gives rise to complexities in this area under the EU Treaties.’

On citizens’ cross-border rights, the EU and UK are at odds. The EU sees the CJEU having a role in determination of those on a permanent basis, says Greene. 

Issue: 7760 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
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