{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.009400705052878966, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.795918367346939, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
UK Post Brexit Access to the EU and its Effect on Dispute Resolution

This paper attempts to analyse some of the factors which may increase the pressure to refer to EU law and EU jurisdictions when drafting contracts, particularly if no agreement is reached between the EU and UK on jurisdictional matters such that there is an absence of an adequate enforcement mechanism. EU supervisory authorities may require reference to the law of one of the Member States to ensure effective investor protection and to determine the systemic relevance of certain activities. In terms of risk assessment, outcomes may be different depending on the legal system on which the contracts are based. The presence of UK banks and investments firms as subsidiaries in the EU, with stronger involvement with EU clients, could also mark a shift towards the use of EU law.