header-logo header-logo

The House of Lords & the EU Withdrawal Bill (Pt 2)

23 February 2018 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7782 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail
nlj_7782_zander_0

This week, Michael Zander considers retained EU law & modified powers

  • The Constitution Committee has called for changes regarding the Parliamentary procedures for passing the hundreds of statutory instruments that will be required.

The Constitution Committee’s report on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill (HL Paper 69, January 29, 2018) says: ‘[T]he creation of retained EU law by the Bill will introduce uncertainties and ambiguities into the law. These will be compounded if the Bill does not direct the courts clearly as to how they should go about the task of interpreting retained EU law.’ (para 125)

In regard to pre-exit retained EU law that has not been modified, clause 6(3) of the Bill provides that questions as to interpretation will be determined by reference to any retained case law and any retained general principles of EU law. Only the Supreme Court and the High Court of Justiciary in Scotland would be free to depart from pre-exit decisions of the European Court. In deciding whether

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll