header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
05 August 2016 / Tim Malloch
Issue: 7711 / Categories: Features , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

A Chinese takeaway (Pt 4)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7696_malloch_1

Why have the dynamics of the Hinkley Point C negotiation changed since the EU referendum, asks Tim Malloch
    • Unless and until the UK specifically rules out joining the EEA as part of the Brexit process it would be prudent to assume that the existing EU rules on state aid will continue to apply to the UK. Accordingly, Brexit does not mean saying auf wiedersehen to the Austrian state aid challenge to HPC or indeed to similar state aid challenges to any future nuclear projects in the UK.

    Before the EU referendum result, the UK government appeared to be driving the pace of the Hinkley Point C (HPC) negotiations. At the Energy and Climate Change Select Committee (the ECCSC) hearing on 24 May 2016 Andrea Leadsom, then a Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) energy minister, stated that the UK government wanted EDF to take a final investment decision as soon as possible (see Question 211 Oral evidence: UK New Nuclear: Status Update, HC 176, 24 May 2016).

    Following

    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
    Sponsored by
    Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

    Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

    Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

    Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

    Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

    Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

    Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

    Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

    Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

    NEWS
    Read All
    NLJ this week: Is inequality undermining trust?
    The legal profession’s claim to be a ‘guardian of fairness’ is under scrutiny after stark findings on gender imbalance and opaque progression. Writing in NLJ this week, Joshua Purser of No5 Barristers’ Chambers and Govindi Deerasinghe of Global 50/50 warn that leadership remains dominated by a narrow elite, with men holding 71% of top court roles
    NLJ this week: Freemasons ruling backs police transparency over privacy claims
    A legal challenge to police disclosure rules has failed, reinforcing a push for transparency in policing. In NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth examines a case where the Metropolitan Police required officers to declare membership of groups like the Freemasons
    NLJ this week: Right to grieve marks ‘major shift’ in employment law
    Bereavement leave is undergoing a quiet but profound transformation. Writing in NLJ this week, Robert Hargreaves of York St John University explains how the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a day-one right to leave for a wider range of losses, alongside new provisions for pregnancy loss and bereaved partners
    NLJ this week: AI privilege battles expose risks
    Courts are beginning to grapple with whether AI-generated material is legally privileged—and the answers are mixed. In this week's issue of NLJ, Stacie Bourton, Tom Whittaker & Beata Kolodziej of Burges Salmon examine US rulings showing how easily privilege can be lost
    NLJ this week: Experts warned—AI use must be transparent
    New guidance seeks to bring order to the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Minesh Tanna and David Bridge of Simmons & Simmons set out a framework stressing ‘transparency’, ‘explainability’ and ‘reliability’
    Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
    back-to-top-scroll