Watch us take back control of the UK’S laws

The Supreme Court should do what it says on the tin – and become our final court of appeal

Yesterday the Government published its latest position paper on how to manage disputes with our European friends, once the UK has left the EU. It faithfully reflects our commitment to deliver on the referendum result, by taking back democratic control over our laws – which means ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). It also offers sensible proposals grounded in global practice for how to resolve future disputes between the UK and the EU at the international level, so that our new relationship under a deep and special partnership agreement can go from strength to strength.

The basic principle is that we need a process that commands the confidence of both sides. It would be partisan and lopsided to allow either the UK Supreme Court or the ECJ to settle international disputes between the UK and the EU. That would conflict with the overwhelming global practice, but it also runs counter to EU practice. The EU has no international agreements where the ECJ has compulsory dispute settlement jurisdiction.

We have set out a range of examples for how international disputes can be sensibly managed. There could be a joint committee to allow diplomats to iron out creases swiftly, before they become a formal dispute. Technical sub-committees could consider scientific questions of fact, or assess issues relevant to particular business sectors. Some areas of our future relationship may need to rely on some form of arbitration mechanism, as is common in free trade agreements. Looking at global and EU practice, this might typically involve a panel of three arbitrators: one appointed by the UK, one by the EU, and a third chosen by the UK and EU arbitrators.

It is crystal clear that this would end the jurisdiction of the ECJ. That doesn’t mean closing our eyes to the world around us. Governments and businesses closely follow the laws and regulations in other parts of the world, especially close partners. It is precisely because we will be taking back control over our laws, and respecting the EU’S right to decide its own legislation, that both sides will want to keep an eye on what the other side is doing.

Divergence in national laws is healthy in a pluralistic democratic world. Equally, it makes sense to be aware of where and how we diverge, so we can manage any tensions or disputes that might create at the international level. Likewise, if certain areas of future cooperation are based on EU principles that work for Britain, EU practice and case-law could be an aid to interpretation – so long as it is done on a voluntary basis.

In our position paper, we look at the range of international and EU practice. In the Eu-moldova agreement, at one extreme, referrals have to be made to the ECJ for interpretation, whose rulings are then binding. Clearly, we’re not pursuing EU membership, so the Moldova model wouldn’t work for the UK. Others have suggested adopting the model under the European Free Trade Association’s (Efta) agreement with the EU. The Efta Court doesn’t have any ECJ judges, and any reference to the ECJ is voluntary. That approach is interesting and works for READ MORE at telegraph.co.uk/ opinion the Efta countries of Liechtenstein, Norway and Iceland.

The UK is not, though, looking for an off-the-shelf model and will seek to tailor a bespoke dispute settlement mechanism that best suits the unique and wide-ranging relationship we are forging with the EU.

These are the principles we will take into the negotiations, and we look forward to discussing them further with our EU partners. At the domestic level, the EU Withdrawal Bill will end the jurisdiction of the ECJ in terms of our national laws. We are proud of our justice system, renowned the world over. We’re proud of our judges. So, the UK Supreme Court should do what it says on the tin – and be the final court of appeal for the interpretation of the laws of the land.

This respects the referendum result, and offers a sensible approach to managing potential disputes, so that the UK’S relationship with our EU neighbours can thrive in the future. Our economy is strong. We’re making good progress in the negotiations. These proposals will help put us in the best position to secure the best deal – for Britain and our EU friends.