Theresa May has insisted the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK will come to an end with Brexit.
As the government published new details of its position, the PM said the UK would “take back control of our laws”.
But critics say it will be impossible to avoid European judges having a role in enforcing new agreements drawn up with the EU.
Ministers say the two sides will keep “half an eye” on each other’s rulings.
The ECJ is in charge of ensuring member states abide by EU law.
Its rulings are binding on all member states, and it also settles disputes between countries and EU institutions.
In its new policy paper, the government: Does not rule out ECJ keeping its jurisdiction during the Brexit transition period that is planned after March 2019, Promises to work with the EU on the “arrangements for judicial supervision” during this period, Makes clear that the rights of EU citizens living in the UK after Brexit will only be subject to British law – a sticking point in the negotiations with the EU and Says giving the ECJ authority over UK-EU disputes would be unprecedented and not “fair and neutral”
The promise to end “direct jurisdiction” in recent policy papers – a phrase not used by Mrs May – has raised questions about what “indirect” jurisdiction the EU court could be left with.
In the latest publication, about how to enforce disputes after Brexit, the government has outlined several models used by other countries that it says show there is no need for the ECJ to be the final arbiter.
But some of these involve the ECJ having an influence on the outcome of disputes, for example by interpreting EU law in a way that binds a disputes panel, or for its past rulings to be taken into account.
