{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026845637583892617, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.876847290640394, '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}}
Decision-Making and Dispute Settlement

This chapter discusses other governance aspects of the Withdrawal Agreement, focusing on its institutional provisions on decision-making and adjudication. Following Brexit, the days when the UK government had a vote in the Council of the EU, including a veto in many sensitive areas, or when there were UK-elected Members of the European Parliament or a UK-nominated judge at the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), are over. With the UK now a ‘third country’, its immediate post-Brexit relations with the EU are no longer governed through the latter’s complex institutional framework and ‘complete system of legal remedies’, but instead by the Withdrawal Agreement as an instrument of international law. The chapter then explains how the decision-making and dispute settlement provisions of the Withdrawal Agreement put the UK into a temporary limbo between, on the hand, the long shadow of EU law and the CJEU’s jurisdiction, and, on the other, a future as a third country that is facing the EU on the other side of the negotiating table or as an opposing party in international arbitration. It also looks at the new inter-party arbitration mechanism.