The possible dispute settlement mechanisms (DSMs) following Brexit are as complex as they are numerous.  What follows is a summary of three recent posts of mine which can be found on the website of Monckton Chambers here, here  and here  and of written evidence submitted by Carl Baudenbacher, Michael Bowsher QC and myself to the House of Commons EU Scrutiny Committee ; and none of … Continuer de lire Dispute Settlement after Brexit, by Peter Oliver

In his speech last week, Michel Barnier, the European Commission’s Brexit negotiator, warned that the Withdrawal Agreement which is to be negotiated pursuant to Article 50 TEU will have to be subject to the law and judicial system of the EU. Of course, that agreement will be an act of the EU institutions and so cannot escape the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of … Continuer de lire Dispute Settlement Mechanisms after Brexit: a Crucial Element in the Forthcoming Negotiations with the EU*, by Peter Oliver

 Résumé : Ce post analyse la décision de la Cour Suprême du RU dans laquelle les juges ont décidé à 8 voix contre 3 que le gouvernement du RU ne pouvait déclencher la procédure de retrait de l’UE sans l’accord du Parlement du RU. Les juges ont néanmoins considéré à l’unanimité que les règles relatives à la dévolution n’impliquaient pas que le gouvernement doive requérir … Continuer de lire Why an Act of Parliament is Required before Brexit is Formally Launched, by Peter Oliver

It is generally agreed that the UK’s departure from the EU will involve the conclusion of not one but of at least two agreements between the UK on the one hand and the EU alone or together with the Member States on the other.  First, there is the Withdrawal Agreement based on Article 50(2) TEU, which by definition will concern the conditions of the UK’s … Continuer de lire The Interface between the Withdrawal Agreement under Article 50(2) and the UK’s Future Relationship with the EU: the Content and the Timing