header-logo header-logo

24 August 2018
Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Prepare for 'no deal', says government

‘Good faith, cooperation and pragmatism from both sides of the English Channel’ is needed to avoid significant ‘no deal’ disruption, a leading Brexit specialist lawyer has warned.

Meanwhile, the Law Society has published research showing ‘no deal’ could lose legal services £3bn by 2025.

The predictions came as the government, which is spending £3bn preparing for a ‘no deal’ Brexit, published 25 technical notices on its preparations this week. The notices cover a range of topics including financial services, pharmaceutical batch testing and support for businesses at the UK-EU border. A further 50 notices are due to be published by the end of September.

Charles Brasted, partner in the Hogan Lovells Brexit Taskforce said: ‘These notices re-emphasise that a no-deal exit next March is a real possibility for which contingency plans need to be made, and in some cases put into action now or very soon. 

‘This is consistent with what we are hearing from many businesses in recent weeks. The notices purport to provide 'pragmatic and practical' guidance on how the government and businesses should seek to mitigate the potential impact of the UK withdrawing from the EU without a deal. The Brexit Secretary, Dominic Raab MP, in his speech announcing the notices, sought to dispel wilder claims in the press about the government's plans, for example in relation to the military being used to ensure the security of food supplies.

‘However, the detail of the technical notices makes clear that avoiding much of the potentially significant disruption of a no deal outcome will require good faith, cooperation and pragmatism from both sides of the English Channel. It is imperative that businesses continue to engage with the government's no-deal preparations, as well as to monitor the on-going negotiations, in order to ensure that they are well prepared for any eventuality.’

Meanwhile, the Law Society published economic forecasts using alternative Brexit scenarios developed in collaboration with Thomson Reuters, showing a £3bn loss for the legal sector by 2025 in the event of ‘no deal’.

‘Brexit is likely to have a significant negative effect on the legal sector in the medium and longer term,’ said Law Society President Christina Blacklaws.

‘This is largely due to the knock-on impact of Brexit on the wider economy as demand for legal services relies on the success of other sectors of the UK economy. Our econometric model predicts 2.2% average annual growth from 2019-2025 with a soft Brexit. This drops to just 1.5% with ‘harder’ Brexit options such as a Canada-style free trade agreement (FTA).

‘If the UK had to fall back on Word Trade Organisation (WTO) rules—a ‘no deal’ scenario—growth would only be 1.1% per year on average over this period.’

Blacklaws said there could be 4,000-5,000 fewer people employed in UK legal services by 2025, under a Canada-style agreement than under a soft Brexit scenario. Some 8,000-10,000 jobs could be lost under a WTO rules scenario. She emphasised, however, that shifts in employment were harder to predict than other figures in the Law Society’s forecast.

Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
back-to-top-scroll