header-logo header-logo

Withdrawal (dis)agreement (Part 3)

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

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Employment law team strengthened with partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

Corporate solicitor joins as partner in Birmingham

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll