header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
13 June 2014 / Michael L Nash
Issue: 7610 / Categories: Features , EU
printer mail-detail

Friends re-united?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
web_eu_friendsreunited_nash

Michael Nash examines the legal conundrum of an independent Scotland’s application to the EU

In February 2014 Jose Manuel Barroso, the outgoing EU Commisssion President, said that “it would be extremely difficult to get the necessary approval of all the EU states for the admission of an independent Scotland”. So far there has not been a definitive statement from Stefan Fule, the Czech diplomat who at present is EU Enlargement Commissioner. The Scottish Government has however noted that no EU state has so far said that it would veto the application of an independent Scotland. So what is the status of Mr Barroso’s remarks?

It is respectfully submitted that this may not be the case at all, it being a situation which has never happened before in the history of the European Union, and its predecessor, the European Community. However, there are a number of examples, the reconfiguration of Germany in 1990 being the prime example, which throw some light upon what is described as a complex situation. This situation, logically argued, may not

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
Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll