header-logo header-logo

15 March 2016
Issue: 7691 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Lawyers campaign for IN

Lawyers—In for Britain, a group of more than 250 pro-EU lawyers, has published a report setting out the reasons for remaining in the EU.

It argues that benefits include easier and cheaper transport and travel, more affordable energy, a cleaner and healthier environment and guaranteed access to the single market.

While acknowledging the EU “is not perfect”, it warns that misconceptions are “playing a pivotal role in the debate”, and sets out myth-busting information. On the amount of regulation from Brussels, for example, it says the House of Commons Library estimates that less than 7% of UK primary legislation and less than 15% of UK secondary legislation make direct or passing references to EU law.

Furthermore, “if the UK were to leave the EU, it is likely that most EU regulation would need to be replaced rather than repealed in order for UK goods and services to be accepted in other EU countries”.

On migration, it says the largest category of migrants come from outside the EU, and that EU nationals can be refused entry on the grounds of “public policy, public security or public health”.

It explores some alternatives to membership, but argues that the UK would need to follow EU rules to have access to the EU market, and that the EU gives automatic access to free trade deals with 50 other non-EU countries. It says that simply relying on the UK’s World Trade Organisation rights would leave UK goods subject to tariffs of between 4.5 and 15%.

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer partner John Davies, Chairman of Lawyers – In For Britain, says: “Our conclusion is that the UK is stronger, safer and better off in the EU. The words I hear the most from those who are undecided are ‘give us the facts’.  We have gathered together what we believe are the most reliable facts that led us to this conclusion.”

Davies and the other members of the group are campaigning as individuals not as representatives of their law firms, nearly all of whom maintain a neutral stance on the issue.

Issue: 7691 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

Senior appointments in insurance services and commercial services announced

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Aviation disputes practice strengthened by London partner hire

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Residential property lawyer promoted to partnership

NEWS
he abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll