Latest articles
UK Immigration Rough Sleeper Rule
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsThe UK government has recently introduced a controversial new set of rules that aim to make rough sleeping grounds for refusal or cancellation of a migrant’s...
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
View all articles
Authors

Some reflections on the options for dealing with international family law following Brexit

Sep 29, 2018, 19:49 PM
brexit, family law, brussels IIA, family law, children, domestic legislation
The object of this article is to consider whether, in the context of international family law, we should simply pull out of these EU instruments and – to answer that – consideration needs to be given as to what alternative provisions could be deployed and to whether those alternatives would be as good as the EU rules.
Slug : some-reflections-on-the-options-for-dealing-with-international-family-law-following-brexit
Meta Title : Some reflections on the options for dealing with international family law following Brexit
Meta Keywords : brexit, family law, brussels IIA, family law, children, domestic legislation
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : Yes
Prioritise In Trending Articles : Yes
Date : Apr 4, 2017, 02:33 AM
Article ID : 114016
If the UK were to exit from the European Union by, as some have suggested, a simple repeal of the European Communities Act 1972 the headline casualty, so far as family law is concerned, would be that the UK would cease to be a party to the revised Brussels II Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility) (‘Brussels IIA’). But that would not be the only casualty – all other Regulations (not backed up by domestic legislation) would fall and, in the family law context, that would mean that the UK would cease to be a party to: the EU Evidence Regulation 2001; the EU Service Regulation 2007; the Protection Measures Regulation 2013, and the EU General Data Protection Regulation 2016. Another important casualty would be European Maintenance Regulation 2008. A less obvious casualty (for the reasons explained below) might be that the UK would cease to be a Contracting State to the 1996 Hague Convention on the Protection of Children (the Hague Protection Convention). On a more general level, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union would cease to apply to the UK and the UK judiciary would cease to be part of the European Judicial Network (EJN).

An alternative strategy potentially espoused by ‘the Great Repeal Bill’ is for the 1972 Act to be repealed but to preserve the current EU rules as part of UK domestic law, the so-called ‘unilateral option’. This would still have the consequence the UK pulling out of the above mentioned instruments in the international co-operative sense, albeit that the UK would continue to apply them unilaterally.

A different strategy is for the UK to seek to be bound entirely or with some modifications to some or all of the above mentioned instruments.

The object of this article is to consider whether, in the context of international family law, we should simply pull out of these EU instruments and – to answer that – consideration needs to be given as to what alternative provisions could be deployed and to whether those alternatives would be as good as the EU rules. If they are not, how can the UK safeguard its citizens?

The full version of this article appears in the April 2017 issue of Family Law. 

Online subscribers can access the article here.

For details on how you can subscribe to Family Law or any other titles, please contact the LexisNexis customer services team: Tel 0330 161 1234, or email: customerservices@lesisnexis.co.uk
Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
Brexit_jigsaw
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from