Theresa May could be forced to water down her pledge to enshrine all EU law into British legislation before Brexit after warnings that the process was turning into a legal “nightmare”, reports Oliver Wright.

Government lawyers working on the so-called great repeal bill are understood to be struggling with the complexity of the task, while experts warned that the plan was “simply not practical”.

Some have now suggested that the bill would have to be substantially watered down or face “serious legal and practical difficulties” when it is introduced to parliament.

Lawyers from across every Whitehall department are trawling through tens of thousands of pages of EU directives and regulations going back more than 40 years. According to some estimates, there are more than 40,000 legal acts in the EU, as well as 15,000 court rulings and 62,000 international standards, all of which would have to be incorporated into UK law.

One former minister described the process as a “nightmare”, while a former government lawyer said that the whole process was “hideous”.

Legal experts said that it was next to impossible to incorporate such a vast body of law into UK legislation on a blanket basis because so much of it was only relevant while the UK was a member of the EU. “You can’t just take the whole of EU law and plonk it into the UK legal system because so much of what the EU does is inherently cross-border in nature,” said Michael Dougan, professor of European law and Jean Monnet chair in EU law at the University of Liverpool.

“Once you have left the EU that doesn’t make sense any more. You can’t force other countries to recognise your decisions any more if you’re not part of the EU. Equally it would be rather preposterous to leave the EU and still give full legal recognition to thousands of foreign decision-making bodies.”

Officials at the beleaguered child abuse inquiry have defended the present chairwoman’s suitability for the role in the wake of suggestions that she should be replaced by a judge.

Alexis Jay, a professor at Strathclyde University, had a long career in social work before becoming an academic. Since she was appointed in August to replace Dame Lowell Goddard, the New Zealand judge who stood down amid claims that she was struggling with English law, Jay has faced criticism that her social work background was a conflict of interest.

A spokesman for the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse yesterday acknowledged that “some detractors insist on focusing on the fact that Professor Jay doesn’t have a legal background, as though a lifetime of investigative work looking at issues of safeguarding and protecting children is somehow less important.

“The inquiry has a strong legal team and two members of the panel are barristers. What Professor Jay brings to the table is a track record of getting to the truth to better protect the vulnerable.”

Jay is the inquiry’s fourth head since it was launched by Theresa May in 2014 when she was home secretary. Most of its senior legal team has also left amid claims that the inquiry is beset by infighting and disorganisation.

One of Britain’s biggest trade unions has called for Uber to be forced to pay its drivers the minimum wage after an employment tribunal ruled that they are employees.

Officials at the GMB yesterday urged HM Revenue and Customs to enforce the minimum wage law and to collect national insurance contributions and PAYE taxes from the US digital mini-cab company.

“We have formally requested today that HMRC investigate the dark maze of tax avoidance at Uber,” said Maria Ludkin, the union’s legal director, in the wake of a ruling last month ago that found in favour of a challenge brought by drivers. The company can no longer try to pass the buck of tax responsibility to drivers by pretending they are self-employed.”

She called on the authorities to act now, maintaining that the union had demonstrated that one driver’s average hourly wage for driving hours was £5.68 and nil for time waiting for work. The legal minimum hourly wage is £6.70.

The union’s lawyer said that HMRC had a legal duty to ensure that the approximate 30,000 Uber drivers in the UK were paid the national minimum wage for all the hours that they were “clocked on”.

Ludkin went on to speculate that “Uber is likely to have to raise fares to comply with employment laws. This will make it less predatory for the rest of the industry.”

Uber UK declined to comment on the GMB’s position. In the aftermath of the tribunal judgment, Jo Bertram, the company’s UK boss, said: “Tens of thousands of people in London drive with Uber precisely because they want to be self-employed and their own boss.

“The overwhelming majority of drivers who use the Uber app want to keep the freedom and flexibility of being able to drive when and where they want. While the decision of this preliminary hearing only affects two people, we will be appealing it.”

Delivery firm latest in employment law line of fire

Outside the gig economy, another union today heads to a tribunal in an attempt to force a reclassification from “independent contractors” to “workers”.

Lawyers for the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain will argue at the London Central Employment Tribunal that couriers working for CitySprint should be granted full rights.

Jason Moyer-Lee, the union’s general secretary, told The Brief that the case was similar to the recent action taken against Deliveroo, the meal delivery company that is very much part of the digital economy. “We intend to expose the unlawful behaviour of the UK’s courier companies,” Moyer-Lee said, claiming that they “have been denying their workers paid holiday, entitlement to minimum wage, and other rights for years”.

Going into bat for the union in the case will be Jason Galbraith-Marten, QC, of Cloisters chambers, instructed by the London law firm Bates Wells Braithwaite. Acting for CitySprint is Timothy Brennan, QC, of Devereux Chambers, instructed by the London office of the US law firm Squire Patton Boggs.

Consumers caught out as UK firms furnished with crippling copyright laws – The Guardian

Facebook scam encourages people unknowingly to break the law – The Independent

Council chiefs under fire over ‘emergency’ grant to solicitors firm – Law Gazette

US law school admissions collapse – Financial Times