header-logo header-logo

27 March 2019
Issue: 7834 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Brexit debacle breaks the system

Westminster model of politics is straining under pressure of Brexit 

The Westminster model of politics has ‘broken down’ under the pressure of Brexit, according to NLJ consultant editor David Greene.

Greene, senior partner at Edwin Coe, who represented one of the litigants in the 2017 Supreme Court Article 50 case, says traditional party politics and government through a working majority are no longer working.

Greene warns there are ‘distinct problems’ with the idea of Parliament taking control through indicative votes, a process due to take place this week in Parliament after MPs passed Oliver Letwin’s amendment 329-302.

Writing in this week’s NLJ, Greene says: ‘There is likely to be no majority for any one proposal because, as throughout this process, there is little give and take, the alternatives are not binary and relate to Withdrawal Agreement and political statement as to the future relationship in different measure.

‘There will undoubtedly be gaming of the system and it doesn’t really test the consensus. In any event, vitally, whatever the answer, it is not binding. Indeed, the government could simply come back with the prime minister’s deal (speaker allowing) with threats of the alternatives informed by the indicative vote.

‘What would be binding is legislation. In extreme circumstances Parliament can take control of the legislative programme but that is revolutionary because it represents a loss of confidence in the government and may impose on the government legislation contrary to the manifesto.’

Currently, the UK Parliament must pass the Withdrawal Agreement by 29 March in order to secure an Art 50 extension until 22 May. If this does not happen then Art 50 is extended only until 12 April, when the UK will leave without a deal unless it has indicated a credible way forward for the European Council to consider.

Charles Brasted, partner at Hogan Lovells, says: ‘The risk of a no-deal Brexit remains critical. Businesses must now adjust their preparations to fit the new timetable, while continuing to press for a positive resolution.’

Issue: 7834 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll