header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 November 2022 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 8002 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , EU , Brexit
printer mail-detail

Taking back control over retained EU law

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
100244
Michael Zander KC reports on the Retained EU Law (Revocation & Reform) Bill
  • The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, in its current form, provides for ministers to revoke or modify non-statutory retained EU law.
  • It contains a sunset provision of 31 December 2023 (which can be postponed, but not beyond 23 June 2026).
  • There are concerns as to whether government departments will be able to consider 2,400 legislative provisions before the end of next year.

The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill had its second reading in the Commons on 25 October—the day that Rishi Sunak became prime minister, and the day too that Jacob Rees-Mogg, the minister in charge of the Bill, resigned.

‘Retained’ EU law (REUL) was the way Theresa May’s European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 dealt with EU law post-Brexit. It was to continue with statutory effect unless and until amended or repealed by legislation.

The current Bill provides for ministers to revoke or modify non-statutory REUL through secondary

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll