Brexit uncertainty persists

Theresa May flew to Scotland this week to try to shore up support for the Brexit deal before an almost certainly stormy vote in the House of Commons next month.

With both main political parties divided and confused, it remains unclear whether a future Britain will be Norway, Canada, Singapore or just poorer, while many in the pro-EU camp are clinging to the possibility of a second referendum.

Last week, city lawyers gave a broadly positive response to the 585-page draft withdrawal agreement itself.

Meanwhile, the Bar Council has followed the Law Society in issuing advice to its members on what to do in the event of a no deal Brexit. It warned barristers that, even if the prime minister’s plan is accepted by Parliament, the shape of any agreement on professional services is ‘extremely uncertain’.

Moreover, a no deal could impact on those working in family, personal injury and even criminal cases where any of the key individuals such as victims and witnesses are in an EU member state.

The paper also explains that although the intention of the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018 is to import EU law wholesale into UK law on Brexit day, amendments may be made by statutory instrument. It states that the ‘legislative structure inevitably gives rise to widespread uncertainty as to the likely amendments and repeals that will be made in a no deal situation.

‘In addition, although the message received from [government] is “no policy change”, some changes are inevitable as a result of no longer being inside the EU. Moreover, the speed and extent of future divergence is difficult to predict and is likely to vary from one policy area to another. There would also be significant challenges in making certain regimes work effectively in the absence of reciprocity from other member states and/or the EU.’