header-logo header-logo

08 September 2017 / David Greene
Issue: 7760 / Categories: Opinion , Brexit
printer mail-detail

A Brexit reality check

nlj_7760_greene

Civil servants are seeking to wrestle political hubris & legal reality, says David Greene

As the commons debates the Withdrawal Bill, the government has published two new papers on civil justice proposals with the EU after Brexit which grabbed the holiday headlines as a ‘climbdown’ on the issue of the post-Brexit role of the EU Court of Justice (CJEU). To suggest a climbdown might be adding a little journalistic esprit to the possibilities canvassed in the papers. More generously we might think of them being the product of the confluence of political hubris and legal reality.

The UK red line through the CJEU is well rehearsed. The white paper put it simply: ‘We will bring an end to the jurisdiction of the CJEU in the UK’. The EU Council’s position was set out in its negotiation paper issued in May and in two papers in July. These deal only with what should be in the withdrawal agreement. They foresee the CJEU having continuing jurisdiction over the continued application of EU law after Brexit; to citizens’

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll