header-logo header-logo

UK faces trade sanctions for ‘extremely serious’ treaty breach

10 September 2020
Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail
The European Commission has called on the government to withdraw the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 2019-21 ‘in the shortest time possible and in any case by the end of the month’

In a statement this week, following an extraordinary meeting of the Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee, European Commission Vice President, Maroš Šefčovič said the adoption of the Bill would ‘constitute an extremely serious violation of the Withdrawal Agreement and of international law’. He warned the EU ‘will not be shy in using’ legal mechanisms enshrined in the Withdrawal Agreement, if the UK reneges on its commitments. Legal remedies include fines and trade sanctions.

The row erupted this week, creating unprecedented tensions between the UK and EU as the eighth round of talks concluded. Only one further round of negotiations remains before 15 October, the date set as the cut-off point by the Prime Minister, after which the UK will proceed to a ‘no-deal’ position of trading under World Trade Organisation rules.

The Bill gives ministers powers to ‘disapply’ rules relating to the movement of goods between Northern Ireland and Great Britain and make regulations on how the provisions of the Northern Ireland Protocol on State aid are to be given effect in the event of a no-deal Brexit ‘notwithstanding’ any incompatibility with international law or domestic law.

Downing Street has said the Bill is a necessary clarification of the Withdrawal Agreement, which had been ‘agreed at pace in the most challenging possible political circumstances’. Attorney-General Suella Braverman issued a statement defending the Bill under the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty.

Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis had earlier admitted in the House of Commons that the Bill would break international law in a ‘specific and limited way’, prompting mounting criticism from, among others, two former Conservative Prime Ministers, United States Democrats and senior Conservatives.

Former PMs Theresa May and John Major have both expressed concern that the Bill breaches international law and therefore undermines trust and respect in the UK. Nancy Pelosi, US Democrat and Speaker of the House of Representatives, tweeted: ‘The Good Friday Agreement is the bedrock of peace in Northern Ireland. If the UK violates its international agreements & Brexit undermines the Good Friday accord, there will be absolutely no chance of a US-UK trade agreement passing the Congress.’

Sir Bob Neill, who chairs the Justice Select Committee, has tabled an amendment to the Bill that would create a parliamentary veto on any changes to the Withdrawal Agreement.

Bar Council chair Amanda Pinto QC said: ‘We share widespread concern about the government’s stated intention to break international law in publishing new legislation on customs rules in Northern Ireland.

‘It should not need to be said that this country is built on, and subject to, the rule of law. Undermining this vital principle will fatally puncture people’s faith in our justice system, both at home and internationally. Someone committing a crime in a in a "specific and limited way” nonetheless commits a crime, and an admitted breach of international law in a "specific and limited way” is nonetheless a breach.’

Law Society president Simon Davis said: ‘The rule of law is not negotiable.

‘Our commitment to the rule of law is key to attracting international business to the UK and to maintaining faith in our justice system.’

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, tweeted: ‘This would break international law and undermines trust. Pacta sunt servanda = the foundation of prosperous future relations.’

The Scottish Government said the Bill requires its consent under constitutional rules, as it engages the Sewel Convention. It opposes the Bill.

View the government’s legal position at: bit.ly/35sZBzw.

Read the ‘Statement by the European Commission following the extraordinary meeting of the Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee’ at: bit.ly/33gqsfC.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quillon Law—Neil Dooley

Quillon Law—Neil Dooley

Disputes firm expands fraud and investigations practice with partner hire

Charles Russell Speechlys—Vadim Romanoff

Charles Russell Speechlys—Vadim Romanoff

Firm strengthens corporate tax and incentives team with partner hire

Burges Salmon—Gary Delderfield & Alec Bennett

Burges Salmon—Gary Delderfield & Alec Bennett

Partner and senior associate join pensions team

NEWS
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
In this week's NLJ, Sophie Houghton of LexisPSL distils the key lesson from recent costs cases: if you want to exceed guideline hourly rates (GHR), you must prove why
With chronic underfunding and rising demand leaving thousands without legal help, technology could transform access to justice—if handled wisely, writes Professor Sue Prince of the University of Exeter in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
back-to-top-scroll