header-logo header-logo

21 October 2019 / Michael Zander KC
Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Brexit’s Super Saturday

Michael Zander QC analyses the events in Parliament on 19 October, and asks: what happens next?

19 October was the first Saturday sitting of Parliament since the Falklands War in 1982. The government’s hope was that the House of Commons would approve the EU withdrawal agreement and political declaration brought back from last week’s EU Council meeting by an understandably well pleased Boris Johnson.

The prime minister began his statement just after 9.30am. He spoke for half an hour, commending the withdrawal agreement. There followed an hour and half of responses with contributions, many extremely critical, from 55 MPs, before the proceedings turned to the government’s motion.

Section 13(1)(a) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (‘Parliamentary approval of the outcome of negotiations with the EU’) provides that the withdrawal agreement may be ratified only if a minister of the crown has laid before each House:

(i) a statement that political agreement has been reached;

(ii) a copy of the withdrawal agreement; and

(iii) a copy of the framework for the future relationship.

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

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll