It had escaped my notice that in June the EU proposed a series of amendments to the Withdrawal Agreement. These are described as corrections and as dealing with situations unforeseen at the time the WA was signed (as per Art 164 WA). The proposed amendments are … 1/n
To do with the UK’s financial contributions, and social security coordination. Others involve Annex 2, which sets out legislation that applies via Art 5(4) without exceptions to NI. Several regulations are proposed for inclusion, which had been omitted by mistake or are new …2/n
Then there are clarifications to the EU’s trade remedies applied to NI. These have no exceptions, unlike ordinary EU customs duties which are waived for products not ‘at risk’ of being moved to the EU. That is strange. Why are these not treated the same as ordinary duties? … 3/n
But what do the amendments propose? One says its purpose is to apply safeguards legislation to products not ‘at risk’ of being moved to the EU. But as said, Annex 2 (badly, for duties) applies regardless of risk. Others remove NI as a de facto MS under TDI legislation. Why? 4/n
I am still working my way through this. Also, the UK has not yet (apparently) consented to these amendments. So: what does it mean? Does it affect the new customs legislation we now await? Any thoughts from @GeorgePeretzQC, @SamuelMarcLowe, @hhesterm, others …? 5/5

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Lorand Bartels

Lorand Bartels Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Lorand_Bartels

14 Mar 19
@pmdfoster Art 62 VCLT comes with conditions. First, the changed ‘circumstances’ cannot have been foreseen by the parties. So if the treaty provides for these, Art 62 does not apply. Second, it’s not about breach, but about bare facts. 1/n
@pmdfoster So here we are talking about the emergence of unicorns (to use the vernacular) that are not presently foreseen, which ‘radically transforms the obligations’ of the treaty. But the treaty regulates the emergence of those unicorns. So how can Art 62 apply? 2/n
@pmdfoster Fns for the above: ICJ case Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros [1997] ICJ Rep 7, para 111 et seq
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!