EU judges to rule on Brexit
Britain has privately conceded that EU judges will be legal arbiter of disputes over payments to Brussels and the residency rights of more than three million European citizens.
In an attempt to break the deadlock in a key part of the negotiations Theresa May’s government has agreed to give the European Court of Justice (ECJ) the final say in the arbitration of arguments over the working of Brexit and any disputes over Britain’s £39 billion (NZ$75b) bill.
EU judges will also have the final say over a Irish border ‘‘backstop’’ if the trade deal between Britain and Europe leads to frontier checks. Brexiteers said that the concession was another climbdown by May. Sir Bernard Jenkin, a Tory eurosceptic, said that it was unacceptable and that Brexiteers would reject it in parliament. ‘‘This is very profound. It is giving a status to the European Court of Justice in the withdrawal agreement that is not accorded to the Supreme Court in the United Kingdom,’’ he said. ‘‘That makes it a deeply unequal relationship and therefore unacceptable.’’
Iain Duncan Smith, a former Tory minister, said: ‘‘This would be akin to saying that a UK citizen living in America could have their rights protected by a UK court.’’
A UK government source insisted that the ECJ would not have the final say. ‘‘We have categorically rejected any proposal that would see the court of one side decide disputes,’’ they said.
Under the withdrawal agreement and a parallel future ‘‘association agreement’’, the European Commission would be able to go to the ECJ for rulings on European law even if the court’s role is resisted by a British government.
A joint committee of officials will consider all disputes alongside a planned arbitration panel and under the current EU draft text ‘‘may, at any point, decide to submit the dispute brought before it to the Court of Justice of the EU for a ruling ... The Court of Justice of the EU shall have jurisdiction over such cases and its rulings shall be binding on the Union and the UK.’’
EU negotiators now believe that the issue of dispute resolution has been settled. ‘‘If there is no consensus then disputes go to the ECJ,’’ said one. ‘‘This is an important development.’’
‘‘This would be akin to saying that a UK citizen living in America could have their rights protected by a UK court.’’ Iain Duncan Smith, a former Tory minister