header-logo header-logo

16 February 2018 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7781 / Categories: Features , Brexit
printer mail-detail

The House of Lords & The EU Withdrawal Bill (Pt 1)

nlj_7781_zander

Michael Zander considers the Constitution Committee’s report on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill

  • The committee believes the Bill ‘is fundamentally flawed from a constitutional perspective in multiple ways’ and proposes changes to make it ‘more fit for purpose’.

The respected House of Lords Constitution Committee issued a highly critical report on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill on January 29—the day before the House began its Second Reading Debate.

The committee is chaired by Baroness (Ann) Taylor, Leader of the House of Commons under Tony Blair. Its 12 members include former Lord Chief Justice Lord Igor Judge, Lord (David) Pannick QC, and political scientists Professor Lord Morgan and Professor Lord Norton of King’s College London and University of Hull respectively. The members are four Conservatives, four Labour, two Liberal Democrats and two crossbenchers. The 80-page report (2017-18 HL Paper 69) was unanimous.

In its Interim Report on the Bill, published 7 September 2017, the Committee concluded that the Bill raised ‘a series

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll