Simon Parsons reflects on the UK Internal Market Bill & attempts to exclude judicial review for errors of law
- The UK Internal Market Bill.
- Ouster clause: attempts to exclude judicial review for errors of law.
- Errors of law: the courts have been willing to review errors of law but are only able to review errors of fact in limited circumstances.
The UK Internal Market Bill, Pt 5, if it had become law would have broken international law by giving ministers powers to make regulations in respect of Northern Ireland customs and state aid which would have been inconsistent with the UK’s commitments under Art 4 of the Withdrawal Agreement which states that the UK must, via primary legislation, fully implement that agreement in domestic law. In particular the regulations would have disapplied (in respect of the Northern Ireland (NI) Protocol) s 7A of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (inserted by legislation in 2020) which is the conduit by which the Withdrawal Agreement flows into domestic law. The fact
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
