header-logo header-logo

Shaky foundations?

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

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll