header-logo header-logo

18 January 2023
Categories: Legal News , EU , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Retained EU Bill plea from the Law Society

The Law Society issued a plea for an extension and clarity on what’s at stake this week as the controversial Retained EU Law Bill entered its final stage in the House of Commons.

It urged the government to publish an exhaustive list of every piece of legislation being revoked under the sunset clause to ensure adequate scrutiny of what might be lost. 

Under the bill, all EU-derived laws would be repealed at the close of this year unless specifically protected by the government. At stake are thousands of laws on food safety, building safety and fire prevention regulations, consumer protection, health and safety, holiday pay, maternity provision, environmental law and a wide variety of other assorted provisions. Critics of the bill have warned it would leave businesses in chaos.

The Law Society called on the government to extend the time line for reform and remove the 31 December 2023 deadline for reviewing retained law.

Spelling out the Law Society’s concerns, president Lubna Shuja said: ‘As it stands the bill would entail bypassing parliamentary scrutiny and stakeholder consultation by giving Ministers the power to independently revoke, restate, replace or update retained EU law.

‘If enacted as is, the bill could lead to different interpretations of the law by different courts and to the nations of the UK enforcing different regulations. This would not only unbalance the devolution settlements, it could also lead to legal confusion for businesses and consumers for decades to come.

‘Clause 7 takes the highly unusual step of giving powers to the Law Officers—the Attorney General, the Solicitor General and the Advocate General—to interfere in civil litigation after a case has concluded.

'This is contrary to the interests of justice and the rule of law.

‘Our members—solicitors—are particularly concerned workers could lose access to long-established rights that now form an integral part of Britain’s reputation as a fair society, such as holiday pay or protection against fire and rehire.’

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
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
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll