Draft Private International Law (Implementation of Agreements) Act 2020 (Extension of Operative Period) Regulations 2025
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
General CommitteesRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Jake Richards)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Private International Law (Implementation of Agreements) Act 2020 (Extension of Operative Period) Regulations 2025.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. The instrument before the Committee will extend the powers to make regulations to implement private international law, or PIL, agreements for a further five years, from 13 December 2025. If the powers are not extended, they will permanently lapse. As hon. Members are doubtless aware, PIL rules are a set of rules applied by courts and parties involved in legal disputes that raise cross-border issues. They generally apply in the context of civil and family law. In short, PIL agreements help govern how we live, work and trade across borders.
Most domestic provisions implementing PIL agreements concern technical matters and are limited in scope. Therefore, implementation can appropriately be handled via secondary legislation. That is because policy issues are often settled when the PIL agreement is negotiated, so the implementation process largely focuses on the procedural changes needed to give effect to the policy decisions reached during negotiations.
The Committee will no doubt be interested to hear about the UK-wide consultation of experts carried out by the UK Government. The vast majority of respondents considered that these powers had been used properly to date, that their safeguards are effective and that their continued use is in the public interest, as the powers provide a single, clear means of implementing PIL agreements, making proportionate use of parliamentary time.
The instrument will extend the powers to make regulations under section 2 and schedule 6 of the Private International Law (Implementation of Agreements) Act 2020. Section 2 of the Act allows the “appropriate national authority” to make regulations for the purposes of implementing international agreements and applying them between the UK’s different jurisdictions, and to extend those regulation-making powers for a further five years. The Scottish and Northern Irish national authorities can grant permission to the Secretary of State to make regulations on their behalf, including regulations extending the five-year operative period in their jurisdictions, as they have done in this case. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee for its review of this instrument and for its clear and concise summary in its 36th report.
These powers provide a single, clear method for implementing PIL agreements, protect the public interest by ensuring that parliamentary time is used effectively, and retain the effective safeguards and limits on the powers provided by the Act. They are vital in ensuring the UK’s credibility with its international partners, reassuring them that PIL agreements can be implemented in a timely way and granting our promises extra weight. By way of example, the powers were used to implement the 2019 Hague convention on judgements. Absent the powers granted by the Act, primary legislation would have been needed, thereby delaying implementation. Our ratification of Hague 2019 was warmly welcomed by the legal sector, and indeed Members of this House, as an important step for international civil and commercial co-operation.
The Government consider that PIL agreements are a useful way of supporting the success of the Prime Minister’s mission for growth, and the powers will ensure that all parts of the country can take advantage of that. The Government propose that the powers will now be used to implement the Singapore convention on mediation, which would allow cross-border commercial mediation settlements to be recognised and enforced more easily before UK courts. That will save businesses time and money that would otherwise be spent on proceedings for breach of contract, and support our world-renowned legal and alternative dispute resolution sectors. Furthermore, in July 2023, the Government confirmed their intention at this stage to implement two model laws that had been adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, of which the UK is a member state.
The Act imposes a duty on the Secretary of State to consult such persons as they consider appropriate before using the powers. As hon. Members will be aware from the explanatory memorandum, the Government held a targeted consultation of experts on whether to extend the power for a further five years. Those experts included academics, lawyers and professional bodies from all parts of the UK. The vast majority agreed with the extension of the powers, for the reasons I outlined earlier.
During the passage of the Act, concerns were raised in the other place regarding the extent of the powers, which led to amendments introducing various safeguards. Those include the prohibition on granting legislative powers, a ban on the creation of imprisonable offences, and the establishing of the five-year extendable time limit, which is the subject of the instrument before the Committee. Furthermore, most regulations made using the powers would be subject to the affirmative procedure. Therefore Parliament, and where appropriate the devolved legislatures, retain the ultimate say regarding the use of these powers. I would further add that several consultees noted the proportionate use of the powers to date and the effectiveness of the safeguards, and judged that the benefits greatly outweighed concerns raised during the passage of the Act. For those reasons, I ask the Committee to approve the regulations.
Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine.
As the Minister outlined, the regulations extend the period during which Ministers can use powers under the Private International Law (Implementation of Agreements) Act 2020. The Act allows the Government to implement international agreements on private international law through secondary legislation, rather than by bringing forward new primary legislation each time. Private international law deals with cross-border legal issues, such as which country’s courts can hear a case, which country’s laws apply, and how judgments made in one country can be recognised and enforced in another. It affects families, businesses and individuals alike, helping to provide certainty and clarity when disputes span different jurisdictions.
The Act was introduced by the previous Government as part of the UK’s post-Brexit legal framework. After we left the EU, many of the reciprocal arrangements we had previously participated in stopped applying automatically. The Act therefore provided a mechanism to fill those gaps quickly and efficiently, ensuring that the UK could continue to enter into and implement international agreements that support co-operation in civil and commercial matters.
It was recognised at the time that giving Ministers the ability to implement such agreements through secondary legislation raised important constitutional questions. As a result, Parliament agreed to include the safeguard that the powers would expire after five years unless extended by further parliamentary approval. That is the purpose of the regulations: to extend these powers until December 2030. My understanding is that since the Act came into force, the powers have been used only twice, and I am assured that both instances appear to have been straightforward and to have received broad cross-party support. That limited use reflects the narrow scope and careful oversight that Parliament intended.
Extending the powers will ensure that the Government can continue to give effect to new international agreements in this area without unnecessary delay or legal gaps. It will also maintain the UK’s credibility as a reliable partner in international legal co-operation, giving confidence to those we negotiate with that we have the tools to implement our treaty commitments effectively. However, transparency will help to maintain confidence that the powers will continue to be exercised proportionately and only when necessary, so I have a couple of questions for the Minister.
The Minister mentioned a number of future intended uses, including the Singapore agreement and two UN-related trade agreements. Are there any other agreements on the horizon that the Government intend to use this mechanism for? He also mentioned that the majority of consultees were happy with how things had been promoted to date, which suggests that some people were not. Could he perhaps outline examples of where there have been misgivings about the use of the legislation?
Jake Richards
I am grateful to the hon. Member for his contribution. On the two issues he raised, policy agreements on an international framework are obviously for the relevant Department. The Department for Business and Trade will be bringing forward its proposals in relation to what I mentioned in my speech. The Singapore agreement is covered by the Ministry of Justice, and Minister Sackman will be considering the procedure for how we implement it in the coming weeks and months.
The vast majority of the consultations were positive. In fact, those that were negative were not particularly proactive in their negativity. I am happy to share all the consultation responses with the hon. Member, if that would be helpful.
Question put and agreed to.