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
Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

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
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’ 
NLJ this week: Family law urged to ditch adversarial instincts
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll