/explore
|
You are here 
|
eurelationslaw.com | ||
| | | | |
reconnect-europe.eu
|
|
| | | | | [AI summary] The article discusses the UK's approach to modifying retained EU law post-Brexit, focusing on legal uncertainties and Rule of Law concerns arising from different methods of amendment, such as disapplication, delegated powers, and express repeal. | |
| | | | |
publiclawforeveryone.com
|
|
| | | | | Earlier this week, the UK Supreme Court gave judgment in relation to the "Scottish Continuity Bill" [2018] UKSC 64. The matter reached the Court through a reference made under section 33(1) of the Scotland Act 1998, according to which the Court has jurisdiction to rule on "the question of whether a [Scottish] Bill or any... | |
| | | | |
ukconstitutionallaw.org
|
|
| | | | | In his latest blog on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, Paul Craig criticises the recommendation of the House of Lords Constitution Committee ("HLCC"), at paras 70 and 93, that all retained direct EU law (defined by the HLCC to encompass all the law continued under clauses 3 and 4 of the Withdrawal Bill) should be... | |
| | | | |
www.translegalproject.org
|
|
| | | Download this article here:IntroductionThis articlecritically discusses the judgmentin For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16. I have tried where possible for itbe accessible to non-lawyers and to lawyers of all specialisms. The articleis not intended to be comprehensive in its critique of the judgment but focuseson three points:1. The implications of the Court declining to considerunder section 3(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998whether its interpretation would breach t | ||
