header-logo header-logo

26 May 2017 / Martin Burns
Issue: 7747 / Categories: Features , Brexit , EU , Property
printer mail-detail

Shaky foundations?

EU law underpins the provision of dispute resolution to resolve property & construction disputes, says Martin Burns. So what will happen post-Brexit?

An inevitable consequence of the decision by the UK to leave the EU is uncertainty. This is particularly so for those of us who are involved in property and construction.

Brexit compels the industry to examine the adequacy of regulatory systems, and the extent to which some EU law will stay and some is swept away. It obliges us to explore the modifications which will be required, or not, across all areas, including: investment, procurement, financing, and sourcing labour and materials.

One area where it is unclear as to how Brexit will impact is in the way the UK property and construction sector manages conflict and resolves disputes. EU law underpins the provision, operation and enforcement of different forms of dispute resolution. When that law ceases to apply in the UK, the nature of the legal regime that replaces it is clearer in some areas than in others.

Ultimately, repercussions for dispute resolution

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll