(BR)EXIT from the EU

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Told

The United Kingdom (UK) has voted to leave the European Union (EU). Ever since the deficiencies of Art. 50 TEU allowing for an exit from the EU (‘Exit’) have caused legal uncertainty. This article intends to shade light on the main questions causing this uncertainty: In a first main part it elaborates on the requirements to be met in order to invoke Art. 50 TEU. As of now, it is discussed highly controversially if a notification pursuant to Art. 50 TEU is conditional upon the compliance with national constitutional requirements and if such a notification can be unilaterally revoked. It is found that national constitutional requirements have to be met before Art. 50 TEU can be invoked and that a notification is not unilaterally revocable. Furthermore, this part elaborates on the requirements for the conclusion of an Exit-agreement as well as the consequences of an Exit without an Exit-agreement. The second main part of the article shifts perspective to potential future legal relations between a former Member State and the EU. It structures possible legal consequences by classifying four different scenarios: (1) No Exit, (2) Exit and the former Member State remaining member of the EEA on the side of EFTA, (3) Exit and bilateral approach compared e. g. to Switzerland, Turkey or Canada (4) Exit and no more direct legal connections between the EU and the former Member State besides multilateral international treaties. In a third part these scenarios are tested on their legal consequences in certain areas of law most of them relating to European business law. Of course, this article can by no means address all affected areas of law and had to make a choice.

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 436-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Vincents Olsen ◽  
Christian F. Rostbøll

The Lisbon Treaty from 2009 introduced the possibility for individual member states to withdraw from the European Union (EU) on the basis of a unilateral decision. In June 2016 the United Kingdom decided to leave the EU invoking article 50 of the treaty. But is withdrawal democratically legitimate? In fact, the all-affected principle suggests that it is undemocratic for subunits to leave larger political units when it adversely affects other citizens without including them in the decision. However, it is unclear what the currency of this affectedness is and, hence, why withdrawal would be undemocratic. We argue that it is the effect of withdrawal on the status of citizens as free and equal that is decisive and that explains why unilateral withdrawal of subunits from larger units is democratically illegitimate. Moreover, on the ‘all-affected status principle’ that we develop, even multilaterally agreed withdrawal is undemocratic because the latter diminishes the future ability of citizens to make decisions together regarding issues that affect their status as free and equal. On this basis, we conclude that it is undemocratic for a member state such as the United Kingdom to withdraw from the EU.


2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 799-805
Author(s):  
Danae Azaria

The CJEU held that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK) is allowed to unilaterally revoke the notification of its intention to withdraw from the European Union (EU) as long as the revocation is submitted in writing to the European Council before the UK's withdrawal takes effect, and as long as the revocation is “unequivocal and unconditional, that is to say that the purpose of that revocation is to confirm the EU membership of the member state concerned under terms that are unchanged as regards its status as a member state, and that revocation brings the withdrawal procedure to an end” (para. 74).


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Stawarz ◽  
Nils Witte

Although the referendum on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union—better known by its portmanteau Brexit—had no immediate legal consequences for migrants, the changed public atmosphere and looming consequences for their status are creating uncertainty among migrants in the UK. This article analyses the impact of Brexit on Germans who lived in the UK and returned to Germany in 2017/18. Our analysis relies on the first wave of the German Emigration and Remigration Panel Study (GERPS), a novel probability-based sample of German return migrants from the EU member countries. The results show that more than half of German return migrants from the UK are strongly affected by Brexit. Furthermore, those who returned on account of Brexit are more likely to blame the political situation, the lack of social security, and their dissatisfaction with life in their host country than those who did not return on account of Brexit – or than those returning from other EU15 member countries. In sum, our results indicate that Brexit may have the unintended consequence of driving out skilled and socio-culturally more integrated migrants who had been living in the UK for several years.


Author(s):  
Sylwia Majkowska-Szulc

Brexit is a unique phenomenon as no Member State has ever expressed the will to leave the European Union. Never before had the in-depth impact of a Member State withdrawal been analysed. The issue has started to be analysed after the referendum in which the British voted in favour of leaving the European Union. The topic of the potential consequences of Brexit in the field of private international law concerns, inter alia, national jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters, mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments, specific procedures of EU uniform law, judicial cooperation between Member States or the functioning of the e-Justice Portal and dynamic forms. Before a given Member State withdraws from the EU, interested parties should have been informed, inter alia, of how pending proceedings will be conducted starting with the withdrawal day, what about proceedings initiated at the date of withdrawal or later on, and what about the rulings of the courts of the applicant state covered by the exequatur procedure before the withdrawal. Therefore, the primary purpose of the article is to determine the framework for the future relationship between the EU and the UK in the field of private international law. An additional aim of this paper is to better prepare natural and legal persons for the new post-Brexit reality. European integration has brought Europe peace and prosperity and enabled unprecedented cooperation in all areas of common interest. Following the withdrawal decision, the state and its citizens cease to benefit from the acquis communautaire. In fact, the United Kingdom left the European Union on 31 January 2020. As far as private international law is concerned, the United Kingdom has become a third country. Subsequently, on 1 February 2020 a transition period has started and it aims to provide more time for citizens and businesses to adapt. The negotiations on the future partnership between the EU and the UK has started in March 2020, but they were postponed due to the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic. The relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union is sometimes compared to love that has passed away, but former lovers must continue to meet from time to time to manage certain common affaires. The analysis of the topic leads to the conclusion that, in fact, Brexit is a unique phenomenon that has no added value.


2006 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 705-717
Author(s):  
Elena Katselli

The Republic of Cyprus became independent on 16 August 1960 with the conclusion of three agreements between Cyprus, Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom: the Treaty of Establishment,1 the Treaty of Guarantee,2 and the Treaty of Alliance.3 Due to limited space, this article will not consider the troubled history of the new Republic the structures of which were literally shattered by an unworkable and dysfunctional Constitution a few years only after its establishment and which eventually led to the Turkish invasion and continuing occupation of one third of its territory.4 Rather, this article intends to focus on recent legal developments provoked by Turkey's refusal to recognize the Republic of Cyprus, a Member State of the United Nations and as from May 2004 a Member of the European Union, in the context of Turkey's own aspirations to become an EU Member State.


This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the withdrawal agreement concluded between the United Kingdom and the European Union to create the legal framework for Brexit. Building on a prior volume, it overviews the process of Brexit negotiations that took place between the UK and the EU from 2017 to 2019. It also examines the key provisions of the Brexit deal, including the protection of citizens’ rights, the Irish border, and the financial settlement. Moreover, the book assesses the governance provisions on transition, decision-making and adjudication, and the prospects for future EU–UK trade relations. Finally, it reflects on the longer-term challenges that the implementation of the 2016 Brexit referendum poses for the UK territorial system, for British–Irish relations, as well as for the future of the EU beyond Brexit.


2021 ◽  
pp. 001573252110122
Author(s):  
Rupa Chanda ◽  
Neha Vinod Betai

In June 2016, the United Kingdom took the world by surprise with the results of its referendum on whether to remain in the European Union (EU). With a 52% majority, the country decided to leave the bloc in which it had been a member since 1973. With this outcome began the long process of Brexit negotiations between UK and the EU. The UK officially ceased to be an EU member on 31 January 2020, with a transition period up to the end of 2020. The decision to leave the EU came on the back of rising bitterness among people. Membership in the EU was seen as expensive and not beneficial to the country. One of the major campaigning points of the leave camp was the issue of immigration. Given that free movement of people is an important part of being in the EU, the party argued that leaving the EU would help the country take back control of its borders. Immigration in the UK has been on the rise since the early 2000s. It shot up further with the accession of the eight East European economies into the EU. Figure 1 shows how, leading up to Brexit, immigration from the EU to the UK was constantly increasing. JEL Codes: F00, F30, F22, F23


IG ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 278-294
Author(s):  
Niklas Helwig ◽  
Juha Jokela ◽  
Clara Portela

Sanctions are one of the toughest and most coercive tools available to the European Union (EU). They are increasingly used in order to respond to breaches of international norms and adverse security developments in the neighbourhood and beyond. However, the EU sanctions policy is facing a number of challenges related to the efficiency of decision-making, shortcomings in the coherent implementation of restrictive measures, as well as the adjustments to the post-Brexit relationship with the United Kingdom. This article analyses these key challenges for EU sanctions policy. Against the backdrop of an intensifying global competition, it points out the need to weatherproof this policy tool. The current debate on the future of the EU provides an opportunity to clarify the strategic rationale of EU sanctions and to fine-tune the sanctions machinery.


Author(s):  
Niamh Hardiman ◽  
David M. Farrell ◽  
Eoin Carolan ◽  
John Coakley ◽  
Aidan Regan ◽  
...  

Modern Ireland is a relatively wealthy and politically stable democracy, but it bears the deep marks of its route to this point. This introductory chapter draws together some key themes that run through this volume and profiles the core contributions of each of its chapters. The overall story is one of contradictory influences. The political institutions of the state, notwithstanding much innovation over time, retain a bias toward a remarkably strong executive. The long-standing weaknesses of social democratic electoral mobilization both reflect and reinforce a conservative and market-oriented tilt in policy priorities. The ideas that animate public discourse show a creative but sometimes problematic tension between republican and communitarian ideals on the one hand, and liberal ideas and values on the other. Ireland has assumed a confident role on the world stage and especially within the European Union (EU), but relations with its nearest neighbour, the United Kingdom, can often be problematic, not least because of the complexity of the politics of Northern Ireland. And while on many measures Ireland is among the wealthiest of the EU member states, this is not the lived reality for a great many of its citizens, and the nuances of why this is so need to be carefully assessed. Overall, this introductory chapter offers an overview of the whole Handbook while also making an original contribution in its own right.


2020 ◽  
pp. 203228442097693
Author(s):  
Gavin Robinson

When the idea of this special edition occurred to the team behind the New Journal of European Criminal Law, my first thought was to go back through all of Scott Crosby’s contributions in print as editor-in-chief and see whether a mini-retrospective on the themes and views therein would be worthy of inclusion here – by Scott’s own standards. These notes focus on what gradually became the single biggest concern expressed in Scott’s editorials: the perilous position of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in a post-Brexit UK – in concreto, the prospect of what he labelled ‘Brexit plus’: a British exit from the ECHR system. I begin with Scott’s views on the European Union (EU) Referendum and the Brexit process. Next comes the great uncertainty currently surrounding the future of Convention rights in the United Kingdom, set against the emphasis placed by the editorials on the instrumental role of the ECHR in fostering peace across the whole of Europe, within and beyond the territory of the EU. In the event that Brexit plus should materialise, writing in the wake of polls showing all-time record support in Scotland for secession from the United Kingdom I close by asking whether Scotland might be able to ‘leave a light on for Strasbourg’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document