header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
08 January 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7869 / Categories: Features , Brexit
printer mail-detail

The EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill (No 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
13679
With a new Government sworn in, Michael Zander provides an update on what has changed from the No 1 Bill
  • With a Government overall majority of 80, the opposition decided not to put their amendments to the vote. However, there is every prospect that the Government will suffer defeats in the Lords next week.

The House of Lords Constitution Committee said of Boris Johnson’s first European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill, ‘The Bill is of the highest constitutional significance’. (See169 NLJ 7865, p10). The Commons gave the Bill its Second Reading on 20 October by 329 to 299, but it then rejected, by 322 to 308, the Government’s very tight programme motion—which led to the Bill being pulled, Parliament being dissolved and the December General Election.

Boris Johnson’s second EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill was introduced on 19 December and received its Secord Reading the next day – this time by 358 to 234. The basically unchanged programme motion allows only two days, 7 and 8 January, for the

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
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

Bird & Bird—Gordon Moir

Bird & Bird—Gordon Moir

London tech and comms team boosted by telecoms and regulatory hires

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
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’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
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
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
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’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
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
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
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’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll