On July 24, 2018, the government presented a white paper on the bill and how legislation works.  The bill was first introduced by the government at the second session stagnated on 21 October 2019 by the government, entitled « A Bill to Implement, and make other provision in connection with, the agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU under Art 50, paragraph 2 of the Treaty on European Union which sets the arrangements for the rekingdom from the EU ».  This bill was not discussed further after second reading in the House of Commons on October 22, 2019, and passed on November 6, when Parliament was dissolved in preparation for the 2019 general election. Most EU legislation should be transposed into national law at the end of the transposition period. The amendments made by EUWA in 2020 provide for a « transformation of EU law into retained European law » and the « domestication of the historical jurisprudence of the Court of Justice » at the end of the transposition period (comments on Bill 2020, point 267). Previously, EUWA had foreseen that this should be done on the day of the withdrawal, as this was essentially prepared for a non-agreement scenario. With regard to the status of `maintained` EU law, it generally prevails over the contradictory UK legislation adopted before the end of the transposition period, but not on the UK legislation adopted after the expiry of that period (subject to derogations): see p. 5 OF EUWA. The intention therefore seems that, if a statute is incompatible with maintained EU law, the statute will prevail, if adopted after 31 December 2020, but that the maintained EUROPEAN legislation will prevail when the statute is adopted before 31 December 2020. However, there is a lot about the application of these rules, which is ambiguous and will probably be controversial. In addition, most of the implementation work will take place after the end of the transition period.
With respect to other rights, etc., « recognized and accessible under national law in accordance with Law 2(1) [of the 1972 Act] » and « applied, authorized and respected accordingly » (i.e., according to s.1A), these are maintained after the implementation period referred to on page 4 of EUWA, as amended by Act 25 al. 3 of the 2020 Act.  Note that, as in the case of the original EUWA, the extent to which the rights arising from the directives are maintained is limited by the provision that these rights must be « recognized ». by THE EU or UK courts in a case that was decided before the end of the transposition period (see 4(2)). The bill described by The Independent as a government « incision » on Conservative rebels would have allowed MPs to review and amend each « line-by-line » agreement.  Conservative MP Steve Baker wrote to The Times stating that the new bill « gives any agreement that we have a good reputation with the EU in British law » and that it is compatible with the referendum result of « giving more control over how we are governed by the British Parliament. »  Note that there are also complex provisions concerning the relevance and effect of Luxembourg jurisprudence in the revised 2020 Law in the revised 2020 Act. For the most part, British courts are not bound by EU jurisprudence adopted after the expiry of the transposition period, but must rule on any issue relating to the validity, meaning or effect of a `maintained EU law` (to the extent that the Law remains unchanged) in accordance with EU jurisprudence. implementation period.
However, the Supreme Court is not bound by the maintenance of EU jurisprudence and a new s.6 (5A) provides a power (exercised only during the transposition period) to provide in the regulations that other jurisdictions are not so bound.