header-logo header-logo

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

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

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 to

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll