This House of Lords report finds that:
-
The current system for civil justice
cooperation across the EU member states - in the development of
which UK expertise has been prominent - works
well.
-
Disputes that cross borders, whether family
or commercial, are currently settled by judgments that are
enforceable across the EU.
-
This gives families, businesses (particularly
SMEs) and individuals the legal consistency and predictability
on which they depend.
However the Committee found that as Brexit
takes effect:
-
Unless the current system of ‘mutual
recognition’ of judgments across the EU is duplicated, not only
will the advantages be lost, but there will be real hardship
for families and businesses, who could be left subject to
national rules across 27 other member
states.
-
The Government has emphasised the importance
of separating the UK from the jurisdiction of the Court of
Justice of the EU. But the key finding of this report is that
alternatives to the existing framework of civil justice
cooperation must be in place before the UK’s withdrawal is
completed.
-
The Committee concluded that falling back on
common law and earlier international agreements that are less
clear, simple or effective, would leave UK citizens with
uncertainty and diminished access to
justice.
Chairman of the Committee,
said:
"Unless the Government can agree a replacement
of the existing rules on mutual recognition of judgments, there
will be great uncertainty over access to justice for families,
businesses and individuals.
“The Committee heard clear and conclusive
evidence that there is no means by which the reciprocal rules
currently in place can be replicated in the Great Repeal Bill.
Domestic legislation can’t bind the other 27 member
states.
“We therefore call on the Government to secure
adequate alternative arrangements, whether as part of a
withdrawal agreement or a transitional
deal."
Notes to Editors
-
Within the report the Committee consider examples
of how EU regulations work in everyday
situations.
Case Study
1: An unmarried couple
are living in Wales with their four-year old daughter. The father
has parental responsibility. The relationship breaks down and the
couple split up, One day, the mother fails to return the child to
the father when expected. It is discovered that the mother has
fled with the child to Poland with her new partner. Having failed
to persuade the child’s mother to return the child, the father
knows that he needs to go to court to get his daughter back to
Wales—but which court to go to and what is the most effective
route to use?
Case
Study: A clothes manufacturer
in Manchester orders and pays for cotton from a supplier in
Greece. When the order arrives, the manufacturer discovers that
the quality of the cotton is not of the standard agreed in the
contract. The supplier refuses to accept any liability and the
manufacturer decides to seek redress through the courts. Where
should the case be heard?
