On 8 December 2017, negotiators for the European Union and United Kingdom issued a joint report confirming that the parties have reached an agreement in principle across the following three areas under consideration, which together form the first phase of Brexit negotiations:
(a) Protecting the rights of EU citizens in the UK and British citizens in the EU;
(b) The single financial settlement; and
(c) The nature and rules regarding the border between Northern Ireland (which is part of the UK) and the Republic of Ireland (which is an EU Member State).
Ireland’s Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, has described this agreement as, “the end of the beginning” of the negotiations. The report is described by the parties as a series of “joint commitments” rather than an independent agreement: the terms are loosely worded, not legally binding, and open to adaptation.
The parties had previously agreed that the Brexit negotiations are subject to the caveat that, “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”; accordingly, the joint commitments published on 8 December shall only take legal effect when they are entered into the final Withdrawal Agreement.
As events unfold, we will be providing regular updates on the legal implications of Brexit.
Related news & insights
News / Court rejects jurisdictional challenge in petroleum dispute
18-02-2022 / Commodities & Trade
Addax Energy S.A. v. Petro Trade Inc.  EWHC 237 (Comm) In a dispute arising out of the supply of petroleum products, the English Court has dismissed a challenge to its jurisdiction, finding that the claimant supplier had a good arguable case that an English jurisdiction clause was incorporated into an alleged oral agreement by way of course of dealing. In doing so, the Court confirmed that the evidence required to establish a course of dealing need not be extensive or consistent to meet the relevant legal test.
News / EU Blocking Regulation, US sanctions and contractual termination – when sanctions and business collide
18-02-2022 / Commodities & Trade, Maritime
In a recent ruling, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) was asked to consider the interpretation of Article 5 of EC Regulation No. 2771/96 of 22 November 1996 (commonly referred to as the “Blocking Regulation”) in relation to the termination, by a German telecoms company, of a contract with a bank subject to US sanctions.
Insights / Court upholds validity of Notice of Arbitration in commodities dispute
12-01-2022 / Commodities & Trade
This commodities dispute highlights the importance of drafting a notice of arbitration carefully to ensure that it covers all the disputes that are intended to be referred to arbitration.
Insights / Tribunal’s findings in commodities dispute result in substantial injustice
04-08-2021 / Commodities & Trade
PBO v. DONPRO & others  EWHC 1951 (Comm)
Insights / Where’s my crude oil? Court upholds claim for return of monies paid under FOB contract
24-06-2021 / Commodities & Trade
BP Oil International Limited v. (1) Vega Petroleum Limited & (2) Dover Investments Limited  EWHC 1364 (Comm)
Insights / Court concludes parties had not agreed to arbitrate commodities dispute
01-03-2021 / Commodities & Trade
Black Sea Commodities Ltd v. Lemarc Agromond Pte Ltd  EWHC 287 (Comm)