header-logo header-logo

Brexit & cross-border dispute resolution

02 December 2016 / Jonathan Harris KC
Issue: 7725 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Procedure & practice , EU , Profession
printer mail-detail

Will the English courts still be top choice post-Brexit, asks Jonathan Harris QC

  • It is unlikely that the reputation and attractiveness of litigating in the English courts will disappear post-Brexit.

Amid the myriad legal issues and uncertainties generated by Brexit, a key question is how the litigation market in England, and the supremacy that London enjoys as a centre for cross-border dispute resolution, might be affected. The recent government announcement that EU laws will, wherever possible, be enacted into domestic law pending further review might assuage that uncertainty, at least in the medium term. That exercise is not, however, as straightforward as it might appear, particularly where reciprocity with member states is required to render EU laws effective.

The landscape of English civil litigation is unrecognisable from that which existed in 1972 prior to the UK joining the then-EEC. In large measure, there is now a set of harmonised EU rules for cross-border dispute resolution. For instance, there are harmonised rules on jurisdiction, enforcement of judgments, choice of law

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

DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Small law firms want to embrace technology but feel lost in a maze of jargon, costs and compliance fears, writes Aisling O’Connell of the Solicitors Regulation Authority in this week's NLJ
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll