header-logo header-logo

Brexit strategy

03 July 2019 / Lucy Pert , Adam Jacobs
Issue: 7845 / Categories: Features , Commercial , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Need to Brexit a contract? Lucy Pert & Adam Jacobs provide a plan

  • The unique challenges posed by Brexit may leave parties with little choice but to litigate.
  • Since the 2016 referendum it has become increasingly common for parties to insert so-called ‘Brexit clauses’ into their contracts.

Brexit and particularly a ‘no-deal Brexit’, whereby the UK withdraws from the EU with no agreements in place regulating their future relationship, will affect many aspects of commercial life in Britain. In some circumstances, parties may well find that Brexit has impacted them in such a way that they are no longer able to perform their contractual obligations or that performance has become unduly onerous.

The legal mechanisms available under English law to parties who wish to discharge contractual rights without breach include material adverse change clauses, force majeure clauses and the doctrine of frustration. Although they operate in different ways, each is concerned with regulating the effects of unfavourable events on contractual performance.

Since the referendum in June 2016, some parties have also included Brexit-specific clauses

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll