23 July 2021
Towards a Radical Revision of the Northern Ireland Protocol?
The UK Government’s Command Paper released on 21 July 2021 urges a renegotiation of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, which forms part of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement. The EU has already indicated that a renegotiation is out of the question. In fact, this blog post argues that it would be constitutionally impossible for the EU to agree to the UK’s proposals without agreeing to a radical revision of the Protocol that would endanger the achievement of its overall aims. In addition, the invocation of Article 16 (the safeguards clause) as discussed in the Command Paper would not resolve the underlying issues either and the UK Government knows this. But that leaves the question: What is the Command Paper really about? Continue reading >>
1 
06 July 2021
A New Constitutional Dawn for Unionism?
In the recent High Court decision on the legislation regarding the Northern Ireland Protocol, the court delivers a number of messages which are suitable to deepen divisions in Northern Ireland, and classes international treaties as merely political compromises not suitable for adjudication. If these views were confirmed before the UK Supreme Court, the EU or anyone else would be well advised to be very careful when concluding agreements with the UK, and to pay close attention to effective enforcement mechanisms beyond UK courts. Continue reading >>24 June 2021
The Northern Ireland Protocol “Sausage Wars”
Five years after the Brexit referendum, the legal stalemate on the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland the impasse between the UK and the EU continues, despite the conclusion of the Withdrawal Agreement and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. While the concept of “state civil disobedience” could be applied to the UK government’s actions since, this is an inappropriate means to conceptualise the conflict. Instead, the more familiar concept of legally justified exceptions to obligations would have been a more appropriate means of pre-empting the dispute during the creation of the Protocol. Continue reading >>20 June 2021
Predictable and Unsatisfying
Most EU lawyers have already seen it looming on the horizon: On 16 June 2021, former Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston lost the legal dispute against her former employer, the European Court of Justice. Although the outcome in this regard was predictable, the decision is overall somewhat unsatisfying. The CJEU seems to be of that opinion in finding that Sharpston’s mandate ended automatically with the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU. The Court does so without revealing its legal considerations and interpretation of EU primary law in its reasoning. Continue reading >>
0
26 March 2021
A Shot in the Arm or a Shot in the Foot?
The European Commission’s proposal to impose what was referred to as an “export ban” on exports of COVID-19 vaccines has generated considerable political and social media comment, particularly from the United Kingdom. The measure is (probably) lawful as a matter of international law and is certainly not a breach of the rule of law. But that does not mean that it is wise. Using the EU’s power in this way is a bit like pulling a brick from the tower in the well-known game of Jenga: the risk is that what is already a somewhat rickety tower (the rules-based trading order) will wobble yet further. More immediately, the risk of vaccine nationalism is that other states will retaliate in a negative-sum game. Continue reading >>19 March 2021
A Tricky Move
The European Commission’s decision to commence legal proceedings against the United Kingdom for unilaterally extending certain grace periods for the movement of goods in contravention to the Northern Ireland Protocol is legally sound, but politically tricky. In legal terms, the decision to launch both infringement proceedings and take first steps towards arbitration is the most promising avenue towards UK compliance with the Protocol. Yet it brings with it a political risk of further escalating the tensions around the Protocol within Northern Ireland and between the EU and the UK. Continue reading >>
0
28 January 2021
Striking While the Iron is Hot
Boris Johnson will reportedly head to Scotland this week in order to demonstrate the benefits of the British union. His visit is likely triggered by the 11 point ‘roadmap’ unveiled on Sunday by the Scottish National Party (SNP) to hold another independence referendum. The United Kingdom is at a critical juncture: the country risks becoming a ‘failed state’ unless the Scottish issue can be resolved. Continue reading >>
0
27 January 2021
Kein Brexit „auf Rädern“
Das Handels- und Kooperationsabkommen zwischen der EU und Großbritannien wurde als "EU-only" Abkommen geschlossen, an dem nur die EU und nicht auch die Mitgliedstaaten als Vertragsparteien beteiligt sind. Juristische Zweifel an der gewählten Rechtsgrundlage sind aber unbegründet, da das Abkommen ein Assoziierungsabkommen ist. Continue reading >>
0
04 January 2021
Mitigating Brexit through Bilateral Free-Movement of Persons
Rather than bemoaning the Brexit choice the UK made, it is time to start thinking about living with it in a way that would cause as little disruption as possible for all those concerned. How to mitigate, at least to some degree, the sudden, unprecedented loss of rights that Brexit caused? EU citizenship not any more on the table, bilateral freedom of movement of persons agreements with the EU Member States, EEA countries and Switzerland could offer a way forward. This solution is fully in line with EU law and has already been tested. Continue reading >>21 October 2020
A Draft is no Infringement
In the last few weeks, little more has been said about the infringement action launched by the Commission against the UK at the beginning of October for failure to fulfil obligations under EU law in relation to the Withdrawal Agreement. However, not only has this not gone away, but the recent ratcheting up of ‘no deal’ tensions means that a claim may soon be made on the so-called insurance policy (the controversial clauses in the UK Internal Market Bill), turning the threatened breach into an actual one. After the Bill becomes law, and assuming that the controversial clauses remain, a minister may use those clauses to pass a statutory instrument, for example, forbidding any checks to be carried out on goods travelling from Great Britain into Northern Ireland. Some would argue that the threat is bad enough and itself justifies an infringement action. That may be so. However, the Commission’s action is still premature. Continue reading >>
0