header-logo header-logo

19 January 2017 / David Greene
Issue: 7730 / Categories: Opinion , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Calling time on Brexit slogans

nlj_7730_greene

The prime minister should add taking Brexit out of Brussels (recast) to her exit planning, says David Greene

Awaiting judgment in the Santos Art 50 appeal I attended the EU Justice sub-committee in House of Lords to discuss what Brexit holds for civil justice. Their inquiry is largely about the future of civil justice co-operation with the EU bearing in mind that Theresa May has confirmed we will leave the single market and that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will not have any continuing binding influence over UK law after Brexit.

The temptation is to adopt the protesters’ slogan: “What do we want? The status quo!; When do we want it? Now! (and forever more).” For good or bad whatever happens will have to work with the UK out of the single market. From my anecdotal soundings the ideal position for litigators is that upon the event of Brexit we agree and adopt, on a reciprocal basis: the Brussels Regulation (recast) and the Service Regulation; sign up to Lugano

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll