header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 September 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7902 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Withdrawal (dis)agreement

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
27510
Michael Zander pins down the issues of the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill
  • The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill: a breach of international law?

Sir John Major, Theresa May, Michael Howard, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron, the former Conservative Attorney-General, Sir Geoffrey Cox, and Sajid Javid were just some of the biggest names who weighed in against the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill.

The issue they all highlighted was that in relation to goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain, cl 42 would permit UK Ministers to disapply exit procedures required by the Northern Ireland Protocol which is part of the Withdrawal Agreement—and that this would be a breach of international law. The same applies to cl 43.

Level playing field

Article 10 of the Northern Ireland Protocol aims to secure that state aid affecting trade between Northern Ireland and the EU is subject to the principle of ‘the level playing field’. Clause 43 gives the secretary of state the power to disapply that part of the Protocol.

Clause

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