header-logo header-logo

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

Brexit & cross-border dispute resolution

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

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll