header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
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)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll