header-logo header-logo

LNB NEWS: Lords put amendments back to Commons on REULRR Bill

09 June 2023
Categories: Legal News , EU , Brexit
printer mail-detail
On 6 June 2023, the House of Lords debated Commons amendments to the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (REULRR Bill). 

Lexis®Library update: The government was defeated on two motions, with a majority of Lords making revised amendments to send back to the Commons. These relate to environment protection, and to Parliamentary scrutiny. Continuing the ‘ping pong’ process, consideration of the Lords amendments in the House of Commons is scheduled for 12 June 2023.

The following motions were passed by the House of Lords:

• Motion A: Commons amendment 1A to Lords amendment 1 was agreed to

• Motion B: Lords amendment 6 was not insisted on

• Motion C: The Lords did not insist on their amendment 15 but Lords amendment 15B in lieu, proposed by Lord Krebs, was agreed to. In putting amendment 15B to the Commons, the Lords are seeking to ensure that any changes to retained EU law do not dilute environmental protection or breach relevant international environmental agreements, ensure that expert advice is sought and ensure transparency by requiring the publication of an explanation of how any changes do not reduce environmental protection and how expert advice supports this

• Motion D: Commons amendment 16A was disagreed to, Commons amendment 16B was agreed to, and Lords amendment 16C in lieu of Commons amendment 16A was agreed to

• Motion E: The Lords did not insist on their amendment 42, but Lords amendment 42B in lieu, proposed by Lord Anderson, was agreed to instead. In putting amendment 42B to the Commons, the Lords are seeking to ensure that the proposed revocation or replacement of secondary retained EU law with alternative provision must first be considered by a sifting committee of the House of Commons

 To view the Lords non-insistence, disagreement, agreement and amendments in full, see: Lords Non-Insistence, Disagreement, Agreement and Amendments in Lieu

To view the Bill as amended prior to Commons consideration of the Lords amendments, see: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (as amended on Report).

To view the transcript of Lords consideration of the Commons amendments, see: Hansard, House of Lords, 6 June 2023 – Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, Consideration of Commons Amendments and Reasons

What’s next?

Consideration of the Lords message in the House of Lords is scheduled for 12 June 2023.

For Bill Tracker updates, see: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill.

Source: Hansard, House of Lords, 6 June 2023 – Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, Consideration of Commons Amendments and Reasons

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 8 June 2023 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: www.lexisnexis.co.uk

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll