header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

A Chinese takeaway (Pt 4)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
05 August 2016 / Tim Malloch
Issue: 7711 / Categories: Features , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail
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
    Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

    Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

    Employment law team strengthened with partner appointment

    mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

    mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

    Corporate solicitor joins as partner in Birmingham

    Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

    Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

    Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

    NEWS
    Read All
    NLJ this week: Alarm bells over Mazur
    The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
    NLJ this week: Jury trial & a constitutional illusion
    Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
    NLJ this week: The rise—and risks—of going private
    Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
    NLJ this week: Human rights disputes push courts to redefine their role
    The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
    NLJ this week: Debarment orders—shortcut or minefield?
    In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
    Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
    back-to-top-scroll