header-logo header-logo

29 November 2018
Issue: 7820 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-detail

A plea for clarity on post-Brexit legal system

Bob Neill MP, the chair of the Justice Committee has written to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) expressing ‘serious concerns’ about the lack of clarity on the justice system in the Brexit post-transition period.

In a letter to Justice minister Lucy Frazer QC this week, Neill said the MoJ has provided ‘little detail or certainty’ about how civil judicial co-operation will be achieved from 1 January 2021, after the transition period ends.

The draft Political Declaration states that ‘the parties will explore options for judicial co-operation in matrimonial, parental responsibility and other related matters’. Neill said: ‘So broad and unspecific a statement provides little comfort.’

Moreover, Neill said the committee was ‘disappointed with progress to date’ on maintaining co-operation on criminal justice and concerned that the loss of access to the European Arrest Warrant, European Criminal Records Information System and Schengen Information System II would have ‘serious downstream consequences. It would impact on time in court, costs in court and the ability to bring justice to bear on criminals’.

There was a lack of clarity on the status of the European Court of Justice, and on jurisdiction and enforceability of judgments after Brexit, and the impact on contractual continuity, he said. He expressed disappointment at the decision not to issue a No Deal technical notice relating to criminal justice measures.

The Justice Committee heard evidence in October from the heads of the Bar Council and Law Society and an expert in finance and capital markets from Clifford Chance.

Neill said: ‘Evidence we heard during our inquiry and our recent session made the serious impact of this lack of clarity absolutely clear.

‘While I am grateful to the Minister for the assurances we received when she gave evidence last month, significant questions remain, putting the global reputation of our legal services sector, its 300,000 jobs and £26bn contribution to our economy at risk. I hope these issues are given a high priority, and in view of the seriousness of the potential impact, have requested a swift response by 10 December 10—before the meaningful vote in Parliament.’

Issue: 7820 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll