Skip to main content

Committee holds civil justice cooperation follow-up session on family law

22 May 2018

The House of Lords EU Justice Sub-Committee hears from legal experts in family law in the second follow-up session on the Committee's inquiry Brexit: civil justice cooperation.


Tuesday 22 May in Committee Room 3, Palace of Westminster

At 10.45am

  • Mr Timothy Scott QC, 29 Bedford Row Chambers
  • Professor Rebecca Bailey-Harris, 1 Hare Court
  • Ms Jacqueline Renton, 4 Paper Buildings


The Justice Sub-Committee published its report 'Brexit: justice for families, individuals and businesses?' in March 2017. It looked at what alternative plans the Government has to replace the loss of important EU Regulations which govern cooperation in civil and family law in the UK post-Brexit.

The session will focus on the future of family law and will explore the progress made so far during the Brexit negotiations, the contents of the Withdrawal Agreement, which includes provisions addressing family law cooperation during the transition period, and the Government's response to the inquiry, particularly the suggestion that it is preparing to wind down cooperation in this field if it fails to agree future arrangements with the EU27.

Topics for discussion

  • What is your assessment of the Government's approach to addressing the significant problems that would arise if the Government did not have a workable plan for the UK's family law system post-Brexit?
  • How do neighbouring states of the EU such as Norway and Switzerland resolve cross-border family disputes?
  • During the debate of the EU (Withdrawal) Bill it was argued with regard to family law that the "Hague alternatives will be perfectly adequate and satisfactory on our leaving the EU". Do you agree? If not, what are the main areas of concern?
  • To what extent does the Government's red line on the jurisdiction of the CJEU limit the alternatives available to the UK? What viable alternatives in the area of family law are available to the UK that do not rely on the CJEU?

Further information

Image: iStockphoto