text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  European Union (Withdrawal) Bill - Schedule 1 - Challenges to Retained European Union Law
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  @ MP voted aye not to allow challenges to EU law retained as UK law following withdrawal on the grounds of invalidity before withdrawal. 
  
  @ MP voted no to allow certain challenges to EU law retained as UK law following withdrawal on the grounds of invalidity before withdrawal. 
  
  The majority of MPs voted not to allow challenges to European Union law retained as United Kingdom law following withdrawal on the grounds of invalidity before withdrawal. 
  
  
  MPs were considering the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill[1].
  
  The motion supported by the majority of MPs in this vote was:
  
  :That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 52.
  
  Lords amendment 52 stated:
  
  :Page 16, leave out lines 11 to 15
  
  The section referred to is within Schedule 1 paragraph 1. The rejected amendment sought to delete Subsections 2(b) and (3) from paragraph 1 which stated:
  
  :Challenges to validity of retained EU law
  
  :1 
  :(1)There is no right in domestic law on or after exit day to challenge any retained EU law on the basis that, immediately before exit day, an EU instrument was invalid.
  :(2) Sub-paragraph (1) does not apply so far asâ
  :(a) the European Court has decided before exit day that the instrument is invalid, or
  :(b) the challenge is of a kind described, or provided for, in regulations made by a Minister of the Crown.
  :(3) Regulations under sub-paragraph (2)(b) may (among other things) provide for a challenge which would otherwise have been against an EU institution to be against a public authority in the United Kingdom. 
  
  
  The explanatory notes to the rejected amendment[3] stated:
  
  :Lords Amendment 52 relates to challenges to retained EU law in domestic law after exit on the basis that an EU instrument was invalid.
  
  :This amendment would remove the mechanism under which a Minister of the Crown could specify in regulations the circumstances in which such validity challenges could be available in domestic law. It would also remove the ability for regulations made under this power to provide for a challenge which would have been brought against an EU institution before exit to be brought instead against a public authority in the United Kingdom after exit.
  
  :The amendment would not affect the general exclusion of challenges to retained EU law on validity grounds after exit, provided for under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1. 
   
  
  ==
  
  
  
  * [1] [https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/europeanunionwithdrawal.html Parliament's webpage on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill]
  * [2] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2017-2019/0212/hcb212withoutendorsement.15-18.html Page of Lords amendments sheet containing Lords amendment 52. Parliament.uk website, 16 May 2018]
  * [3] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2017-2019/0212/en/18212en16.htm Page of explanatory notes to the Lords amendments covering amendment 52, Parliament.uk website, 22 May 2018]
  
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  