scholarly journals Trade and Cooperation Agreement Between the EU and the UK: Conditionality Versus Sovereignty

2021 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-16
Author(s):  
Lyudmila Babynina ◽  

The United Kingdom left the European Union on January 31, 2020. On December 31, 2020, the transition period ended, during which all EU rules and regulations applied to Britain. The trade agreement was reached in record time, but it is too early to talk about long-term mutual benefits. The British case in the system of trade and economic agreements of the European Union is unique. On the one hand, at the time of the negotiations, the UK retained EU law, was a member of the EU Single Internal Market and Customs Union, subject to the jurisdiction of the EU Court of Justice. On the other hand, the EU for the first time found itself in a situation when a third country was determined to distance itself as much as possible from EU rules while concluding a trade agreement, despite the obvious economic losses. At the same time, both sides understood that the absence of an agreement threatened all interested actors with serious losses, and that it must be concluded. As a result, the compromise text of the TCA reflects the fundamentally different approaches of the parties to bilateral cooperation, and its provisions suggest a change of its format in the future.

Author(s):  
V.V. Pushkareva

The withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union with its overseas possessions returned to the political agenda the territorial dispute between Madrid and London over the Gibraltar semi-enclave. The opposite points of view have collided in the context of Brexit: the UK fundamentally defends its sovereignty over Gibraltar, Spain strives to regain the lost territory, the Gibraltarians want to maintain association with the Kingdom and not break with the European Union, the European Union is not eager to grant Gibraltar a special status, but at the same time is interested in maintaining a preferential financial zone in the South of the Iberian Peninsula. Separate issues of relations between the UK and Spain on the situation of Gibraltar for the transition period were agreed, they are set out in the “4 Memoranda”. The further fate of the territory depends on the UK's deal with the EU. The contracting parties guarantee that the interests of both Spain and Gibraltar are taken into account. Possible options: holding a referendum on the independence of Gibraltar; gaining control of Spain over the strategic objects of Gibraltar as a result of the deal; Gibraltar remains under the sovereignty of the United Kingdom and continues to cooperate with the EU; dual Spanish-British sovereignty will be established over Gibraltar; at the end of Brexit Gibraltar will not cooperate with the EU. But each of the proposed solutions requires certain concessions from the disputing parties. They are not ready to compromise yet. The authorities of Gibraltar, however, are aware that without cooperation with the UK, Spain and the European Union, their further successful state and development is impossible. More favorable conditions, in our opinion, for the Gibraltarians will arise with the accession to the Schengen area and the Customs Union.


2021 ◽  
pp. 124-141
Author(s):  
Colin Faragher

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the Treaty framework and sources of EU law as well as the institutions of the EU. It covers the legal background to the UK’s departure from the EU, the legal process through which the UK left the EU, the key provisions of the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (2020), and the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020. This chapter also discusses the effect of the UK’s departure from the EU on the status of the sources of EU law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms as well as failure to transpose a Directive into national law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Francovich principle.


2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 248-264
Author(s):  
Nanette Neuwahl

This article investigates how Canada’s trade with the EU-27 and the UK might be affected by Brexit. As the transition period foreseen in the 2019 UK Withdrawal Agreement has ended, the EU and the UK are no longer one customs area. The EU–Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), like other EU agreements, has ceased to apply to the UK. Henceforth, the policies and legislation of the UK and the EU-27 will invariably diverge. Taking into account both the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement as well as the Canada UK Trade Continuity Agreement concluded in late-2020, the article shows that the agreements reached, while providing immediate stopgaps for some of the fallout of Brexit, also represent potential for a new departure.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Kaspiarovich

In 1972 the UK signed an accession treaty with the EU while Switzerland and the EU concluded a free trade agreement. Nowadays, both countries have a very close relationship with the EU and are not (or not anymore) EU Member States. This article aims to analyse two complex legal paths taken by countries able but not willing (or no longer willing) to be part of the EU through institutional arrangements they have already negotiated or are currently negotiating with the EU. On the one hand, the UK was part of the EU legal order and is now extracting itself from the realm of EU law while switching to relations with the EU based on international law. On the other hand, Switzerland has built its relations with the EU on numerous bilateral agreements based on EU law without establishing a homogeneous institutional mechanism, which the EU has been insistently demanding since 2013. These two situations are paradoxically similar as for both of them the design of institutional arrangements depends on the degree of integration with/extraction from EU law. A comparison between the EU–UK withdrawal agreement, the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) and the EU–Switzerland draft institutional agreement, as proposed in this article, confirms that the degree of institutional flexibility that the EU is able to offer to a third country with which it concludes an agreement is dependent on whether that agreement is based on EU law, and in particular, EU internal market law. This article argues that depending on the nature of law the agreement is based on, from an EU perspective variations in the role of Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and/or of an arbitral tribunal may make sense, but this is not the case when one takes an outside perspective.


2020 ◽  
pp. 33-60
Author(s):  
Sylvia de Mars

This chapter discusses the different institutions that make up the ‘EU government’. It begins by explaining the Article 50 TEU (Treaty of European Union) process, which sets out how a Member State can leave the EU. The chapter then describes the European Council, the European Commission, the Council of Ministers, the European Parliament, and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The two other EU institutions set out in Article 13 TEU include the European Central Bank and the Ombudsman. The chapter then considers how the roles of the EU institutions in the UK will change over the next few years following Brexit. It studies the Withdrawal Agreement and assesses what happens after the so-called transition period.


2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Cranmer

On 23 March, the European Council agreed the terms of a Brexit transition period under which the United Kingdom's phased departure will last for 21 months, ending in December 2020. The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill completed its consideration in the House of Lords with Government defeats on several issues, perhaps the most controversial of which were amendments requiring the Government to explore the option of staying in a customs union (by a majority of 123), limiting the ability to use secondary legislation to change existing EU rights after they have been transposed into domestic law (by a majority of 97) and retaining most of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights on the statute book after Brexit (by a majority of 71).


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-36
Author(s):  
Marta Simoncini ◽  
Giuseppe Martinico

What was the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the Brexit saga? And what will the impact of Brexit be over the future structure and activity of the CJEU? This article deals with this twofold question and explores three different issues. Firstly, we will offer a reflection on the questions and the risks raised by the Wightman case, where the CJEU ruled on the unilateral revocation of the UK notification of its intention to withdraw from the European Union under Art. 50 Treaty of the EU. Secondly, we will analyse the impact of Brexit on the composition of the CJEU and, particularly, the risks for the independence of the Court raised by the advanced termination of the mandate of the British Advocate General. Thirdly, we will provide some insights on the scope of the jurisdiction of the CJEU in the post-Brexit Union, emphasising how the Withdrawal Agreement maintained its jurisdiction during and even beyond the transition period. This article reflects the events that took place up to 6 October 2020.


2021 ◽  
pp. 107-126
Author(s):  
Jarosław Kundera

The Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK) is a free trade agreement signed in accordance with WTO rules. It consists of 12 chapters and many annexes, which contain provisions on the free movement of goods, investments, payments, rules of origin, common institutions, dispute resolution procedure, cooperation in the field of transport, environmental protection, combating terrorism and crime. In view of the UK’s exit from the EU, it is important to analyse, what is most interesting in the Agreement and what it does not contain, e.g. provisions on the free movement of workers, students, financial services, the right of citizens to work, the common trade, agricultural policy, regional policy, financing of the EU budget. Because the Agreement limits the existing freedoms and scope of mutual cooperation, the aim of this Article is to analyse not only its provisions, but also the consequences that it will bring in terms of benefits and costs for the UK and the EU. The author uses a well-known non-Europe methodology in his research, taking into account the fact that things, which are now benefits of integration, could prove to be the costs of disintegration tomorrow. The costs and benefits of the Agreement should be assessed through the lens of the current costs and benefits of the UK’s membership of the EU. From this point of view, the implementation of the Agreement will bring higher alternative costs in the form of lower trade in goods and services, capital migration and workers in comparison with their volume, that can be achieved in the EU. The conducted analysis demonstrates that these costs will not be compensated by the savings from the UK contribution to the EU budget.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Roberts

This article examines the United Kingdom’s negotiating position on the revision of the EU Coordinating Regulations proposed by the European Commission in December 2016, in the context of Brexit and the negotiations on the Withdrawal Agreement. The Withdrawal Agreement contains provisions on the future coordination of social security for UK and EU nationals who have exercised their freedom of movement rights before the end of the transition period. The coordination envisaged by the Withdrawal Agreement has not been sealed at the point of the UK’s departure but will continue to evolve and incorporate future changes in the EU Coordinating Regulations, including the reforms contained in the Commission’s current legislative proposal. The UK had a seat at the negotiating table until it left the European Union on 31 January 2020, which it used to try to influence the reform of the Coordinating Regulations to reflect its future interests. The article finds that, while the UK participated in negotiating the current revision of the Coordinating Regulations and several of the revisions are in line with its aims, its influence is waning as the UK moves from being a rule maker to a rule taker in Europe.


2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-462
Author(s):  
Joris Larik

AbstractThe withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union has prompted a global recalibration of treaty relations. Due to the Withdrawal Agreement and its transition period, the UK is expanding its international treaty-making powers as it is gradually released from the constraints of EU law. Practice to date shows the creation of many new international legal instruments through which governments have sought to address the novel questions that Brexit raises for the international law of treaties.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document