The Global Influence of English Law on Post-Brexit Economic Growth: A Critical Analysis of Legal Services as Soft Power and Economic Strategy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65150/EP-jsshrs/V2E4/2026-03Keywords:
English law, Brexit, legal services exports, soft power, rule of law, international dispute resolution, commercial arbitration, economic growth, legal market competition, post-Brexit UK, international commercial litigation, London as a legal centre, legal services strategy, comparative legal systems, legal influence, global governance, arbitration, forum selection, choice of law, access to justiceAbstract
This research aims to assess the strategic application of English law as a tool of soft power and economic growth in the post-Brexit world. The research is guided by the UK's strategic objectives under Objective 2: "To promote the rule of law at home and abroad and world-leading legal services" and seeks to examine the relationship between law, economics, and international relations. The research examines the legislative and judicial frameworks surrounding the promotion of English law as a first choice for international dispute resolution and its contribution to the UK's economic stability and global standing. The research findings reveal that although English law remains a prominent force in international business relations, the impact of Brexit necessitates strategic adjustments to secure competitive advantage in the face of rising rival legal centres. The research concludes with strategic recommendations for maintaining English legal service pre-eminence in the increasingly competitive global market.
References
REFERENCES
BOOKS
1) Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.
2) Benjamin, J. (2007). Financial law. Oxford University Press.
3) Benton, L. (2002). Law and colonial cultures: Legal regimes in world history, 1400-1900. Cambridge University Press.
4) Bingham, T. (2010). The rule of law. Allen Lane.
5) Born, G. B. (2021). International commercial arbitration (3rd ed.). Kluwer Law International.
6) Briggs, A. (2013). The conflict of laws (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
7) Gaillard, E. (2010). Legal theory of international arbitration. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
8) Hayek, F. A. (1960). The constitution of liberty. University of Chicago Press.
9) Hess, B. (2021). Europeanisation of international commercial law. Hart Publishing.
10) Hodges, C., Vogenauer, S., & Tulibacka, M. (2012). The costs and funding of civil litigation: A comparative perspective. Hart Publishing.
11) North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
12) Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. Public Affairs.
13) O'Hara, E., & Ribstein, L. (2009). The law market. Oxford University Press.
14) Romano, R. (1993). The genius of American corporate law. AEI Press.
15) Siems, M. (2018). Comparative law (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
16) Susskind, R. (2019). Online courts and the future of justice. Oxford University Press.
17) Vogenauer, S., & Weatherill, S. (Eds.). (2006). The harmonisation of European contract law: Implications for European private laws, business and legal practice. Hart Publishing.
JOURNAL ARTICLES
18) Armour, J. (2017). Brexit and financial services. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(S1), S54-
S69. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx014
19) Armour, J., Deakin, S., Sarkar, P., Siems, M., & Singh, A. (2016). Shareholder protection and stock market development: An empirical test of the legal origins hypothesis. Journal of Legal Studies, 45(2), 391-426. https://doi.org/10.1086/689120
20) Bebchuk, L. A., & Hamdani, A. (2002). Vigorous race or leisurely walk: Reconsidering the competition over corporate charters. Yale Law Journal, 112(3), 553-615.
21) Connerty, A. (2015). The role of the DIFC Courts in promoting Dubai as a dispute resolution hub. Journal of International Arbitration, 32(5), 563-584.
22) Cuniberti, G. (2014). The international market for contracts: The most attractive contract laws. Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 34(3), 455-517.
23) Dickinson, A. (2016). Back to the future: The UK's EU exit and the conflict of laws. Journal of Private International Law, 12(2), 195-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441048.2016.1203180
24) Elliott, M. (2022). Judicial review reform and the rule of law. Public Law, 2022(3), 431-452.
25) Ferran, E. (2017). The UK as a third country actor in EU financial services regulation. Journal of Financial Regulation, 3(1), 40-65. https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjw015
26) Flood, J., & Lederer, A. (2012). Becoming a cosmopolitan lawyer: Learning the global market. Fordham Law Review, 80(6), 2513-2540.
27) Galanter, M., & Henderson, W. (2008). The elastic tournament: A second transformation of the big law firm. Stanford Law Review, 60(6), 1867-1929.
28) Gallarotti, G. M. (2011). Soft power: What it is, why it's important, and the conditions for its effective use. Journal of Political Power, 4(1), 25-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2011.557886
29) Gee, G. (2022). Legal services and soft power: The UK's post-Brexit strategy. International Journal of Law in Context, 18(2), 156-173.
30) Huo, Z. (2019). China's Belt and Road Initiative and international dispute resolution: A state-of-the-art overview. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 6(2), 333-354. https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2019.25
31) Joireman, S. F. (2001). Inherited legal systems and effective rule of law: Africa and the colonial legacy. Journal of Modern African Studies, 39(4), 571-596.
32) Kahan, M., & Kamar, E. (2002). The myth of state competition in corporate law. Stanford Law Review, 55(3), 679-749.
33) Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2011). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and analytical issues. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 3(2), 220-246.
34) Kerr, M. (2021). Judicial diplomacy and the promotion of the rule of law. Law Quarterly Review, 137(2), 234-258.
35) Kramer, X. E. (2020). The Netherlands Commercial Court: The long road to specialised commercial justice. Erasmus Law Review, 13(4), 1-15.
36) Kramer, X. E., & Sorabji, J. (2019). International business courts in Europe and beyond: A global competition for justice? Erasmus Law Review, 12(1), 1-9.
37) Linarelli, J. (2017). The economics of uniform laws and uniform lawmaking. Wayne Law Review, 48(4), 1387-1447.
38) Mattei, U. (2003). A theory of imperial law: A study on US hegemony and the Latin resistance. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 10(1), 383-448.
39) Menon, S. (2021). The transnational protection of private rights: Issues, challenges and possible solutions. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 33(1), 1-31.
40) Raustiala, K. (2005). Form and substance in international agreements. American Journal of International Law, 99(3), 581-614.
41) Westbrook, D. A. (2019). The development of the Dubai International Financial Centre Courts. American Journal of Comparative Law, 67(2), 319-357.
42) Whytock, C. A. (2009). The evolving forum shopping system. Cornell Law Review, 96(3), 481-534.
43) Yip, M., & Chua, E. (2022). Singapore as an international commercial court: Progress and challenges. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 13(2), 201-225.
44) Young, S. N. M. (2022). Hong Kong's rule of law under challenge: Implications for international commercial dispute resolution. Asian Journal of International Law, 12(1), 45-71.
45) Zekos, G. I. (2020). Financial Markets Test Case Scheme: Innovation or capitulation? Journal of International Banking Law and Regulation, 35(10), 389-396.
BOOK CHAPTERS
46) Michaels, R. (2021). The functional method of comparative law. In M. Reimann & R. Zimmermann (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of comparative law (2nd ed., pp. 345-389). Oxford University Press.
47) Moorhead, R. (2017). Access to justice and the rule of law after LASPO. In D. Kavanagh & J. Oberdiek (Eds.), Proportionality and the rule of law (pp. 291-315). Cambridge University Press.
48) Nelken, D. (2019). Comparative law and legal transfers. In H. Muir Watt & D. P. Fernández Arroyo (Eds.), Private international law and global governance (pp. 71-98). Oxford University Press.
49) Rühl, G. (2011). The choice of law framework for international contracts. In S. Vogenauer & J. Kleinheisterkamp (Eds.), Commentary on the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (pp. 5-56). Oxford University Press.
50) Thio, L. (2012). Singapore: The administration of justice. In P. Nicholson & S. Biddulph (Eds.), Examining practice, interrogating theory: Comparative legal studies in Asia (pp. 191-228). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
51) Trachtman, J. P. (2000). Regulatory competition and regulatory jurisdiction in international securities regulation. In D. C. Esty & D. Geradin (Eds.), Regulatory competition and economic integration (pp. 289-314). Oxford University Press.
REPORTS, WORKING PAPERS, AND INSTITUTIONAL PUBLICATIONS
52) Amnesty International. (2016). Cuts that hurt: The impact of legal aid cuts in England on access to justice. Amnesty International UK.
53) Asian Development Bank Institute. (2019). Belt and Road Initiative: Legal framework and dispute settlement mechanisms (ADBI Working Paper 1024).
54) Bach Commission. (2017). The right to justice: The final report of the Bach Commission. Fabian Society.
55) Civil Procedure Rules Committee. (2021). Practice Direction 57AC: Trial witness statements in the Business and Property Courts. Civil Procedure Rules.
56) Commercial Court. (2022). Commercial Court Report 2021-2022. Judiciary of England and Wales.
57) House of Lords European Union Committee. (2020). Scrutiny of international agreements: Treaties considered on 5 October 2020 (HL Paper 135). The Stationery Office.
58) Judiciary of England and Wales. (2017). Business and Property Courts: Practice Direction 57AA. Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
59) Judiciary of England and Wales. (2018). Shorter trials scheme and flexible trials scheme guide. Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
60) Judiciary of England and Wales. (2019). Commercial Court guide (10th ed.). Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
61) Judiciary of England and Wales. (2021). Remote hearings practice direction. Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
62) Junior Lawyers Division. (2021). Resilience and wellbeing survey 2021. Law Society of England and Wales.
63) Law Society of England and Wales. (2022). EU exit: Impact on legal services survey results. Law Society Research.
64) Law Society of England and Wales. (2023). International engagement strategy 2023-2028. Law Society.
65) LawtechUK. (2022). Shaping the future of law: A technology vision. Ministry of Justice.
66) Legal Week. (2022). Global 200: The world's largest law firms. ALM Global.
67) London Court of International Arbitration. (2020). LCIA Arbitration Rules 2020. London Court of International Arbitration.
68) London Court of International Arbitration. (2023). LCIA Annual Casework Report 2022. London Court of International Arbitration.
69) Loan Market Association. (2021). Primary documentation: User guide. Loan Market Association.
70) London Maritime Arbitrators Association. (2023). Annual Report 2022. London Maritime Arbitrators Association.
71) Low Commission. (2015). Getting it right in social welfare law: The Low Commission's follow-up report. Legal Action Group.
72) Ministry of Justice. (2022). Legal services strategy: Promoting English law and UK dispute resolution internationally. HM Government.
73) Ministry of Justice. (2023). Legal aid statistics quarterly: April to June 2023. Ministry of Justice.
74) Office for National Statistics. (2023). UK trade in services by industry, country and commodity: 2022. ONS.
75) Portland Communications. (2019). English law and jurisdiction post-Brexit: A survey of international commercial clients. Portland.
76) Queen Mary University of London, & White & Case LLP. (2021). International Arbitration Survey 2021: Adapting arbitration to a changing world. Queen Mary University of London.
77) Singapore International Arbitration Centre. (2023). SIAC Annual Report 2022. Singapore International Arbitration Centre.
78) Solicitors Regulation Authority. (2021). Diversity in law firms: 2021 report. SRA.
79) TheCityUK. (2023). Legal services 2023. TheCityUK.
80) World Justice Project. (2023). Rule of Law Index 2023. World Justice Project.
CASES CITED
81) ASM Shipping Ltd of India v TTMI Ltd of England [2006] EWCA Civ 1341
82) Berezovsky v Abramovich [2012] EWHC 2463 (Comm)
83) Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] UKHL 100
84) Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi AS v OOO Insurance Company Chubb [2020] UKSC 38
85) Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation v Privalov [2007] UKHL 40
86) Halliburton Company v Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd [2020] UKSC 48
87) The Achilleas [2008] UKHL 48
88) Tweddle v Atkinson [1861] EWHC J57 (QB)
89) Vedanta Resources PLC v Lungowe [2019] UKSC 20
Legislation Cited
90) Arbitration Act 1996
91) Brussels I Regulation (recast) (Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012)
92) Constitutional Reform Act 2005
93) Financial Services Act 2021
94) Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements 2005
95) Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022
96) Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012
97) Legal Services Act 2007
98) New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958
99) Senior Courts Act 1981
100) Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom 2020
101) UK Internal Market Act 2020
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Gabriel Obrempong Nyanteh (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
