header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
01 June 2018 / David Burrows
Issue: 7795 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Family
printer mail-detail

Child protection

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7795_burrows

David Burrows discusses the loss of the EU Charter & the potential impact on children

  • How much of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights will remain part of the common law for children?
  • The Ministry of Justice needs to clarify the law before exit day, for the sake of children.

The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill left the Commons on 17 January 2018 with cl 5(4) intact. That clause insouciantly says: ‘(4) The Charter of Fundamental Rights is not part of domestic law on or after exit day’, by which it means the EU Charter (2000/C 364/01). For English law purposes the Charter will disappear (unless the Lords revives it and the Commons relent); and if so how far will what it says remain part of the common law for children?

Disappearance of the Charter only matters, in law, if a case is decided under EU law. Thus, Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 Concerning Jurisdiction… in Matters of Parental Responsibility (Brussels IIA) was picked out for special mention by the

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

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
NLJ this week: 40% penalty for coercive control
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
NLJ this week: Mbappé row spotlights ‘ethics bonuses’
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll