header-logo header-logo

21 October 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7907 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Withdrawal (dis)agreement (Part 3)

29899
A Bill for the birds? Michael Zander on the UK Internal Market Bill’s rough ride in the Lords

In brief

  • The Government had no doubt expected strong criticism from Labour, Liberal Democrats and Crossbenchers, but not that almost half the 35 Conservative peers who took part in the debate this week would speak against the Bill.

The Lords gave the Internal Market Bill a right drubbing during the Second Reading debate this week. Seven hours of debate on Monday was followed on Tuesday by closing speeches and, unusually for a Second Reading debate, a vote. The amendment moved by former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, regretting that ‘Part 5 of the Bill contains provisions which, if enacted, would undermine the rule of law and damage the reputation of the United Kingdom’, was carried (on a remote vote) by an overwhelming 395 to 169.

The Government had no doubt expected strong criticism from Labour, Liberal Democrats and Crossbenchers. It may not have expected that almost half the 35 Conservative peers

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll