header-logo header-logo

22 November 2018 / David Greene
Issue: 7818 / Categories: Opinion , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Deal or no deal?

Whether or not the latest Withdrawal Agreement succeeds, Brexit is still likely to launch a thousand writs, says David Greene

The latest version of the draft Withdrawal Agreement lies before us, but we are no nearer to concluding what the outcome of all the political events will be as we head towards the EU exit. Mine is not to speculate, but to contemplate the two main possible outcomes and the effect on civil justice: a departure with no deal, or a departure largely on the basis of the draft Withdrawal Agreement.

Status update

The Withdrawal Agreement is of course simply a preliminary agreement dealing with the immediate consequences of departure next March. It proposes in the main a transition period until the end of 2020 while the longer-term relationship is negotiated. The agreement provides that the period may be extended, by the newly created Joint Committee, as long as the extension is agreed by July 2020. It might thus be better termed a Transition Agreement; that was how it appeared in its original

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
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

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll