Automatically, but many if not most commercial regulations get incorporated, in this case the warranty legislation also dictates 2 years
> than for something like Brexit I would say the difference lies more in the renegotiation than in the cutting. EU membership doesn't get renegotiated often, while treaties between EU/CH are expected to be renegotiated (although that has a whole host of challenges and doesn't happen nearly as often as you'd expect)
But nullification is a similar impact and a similar process as brexit because most of these negotiations had a guillotine clause which tied them toghether
Brexit was a remarkably straightforward process, you send a letter and at the latest two years later you're out if you don't ask for exception
It was the headless chicken phase when the UK was trying to negotiate without having an internal consensus on what they wanted that was convoluted
> Brexit was a remarkably straightforward process, you send a letter and at the latest two years later you're out if you don't ask for exception
Straightforward is a bit of a stretch.
Brexit was convoluted because the UK is in a weird position where it had a ton of agreements regarding its border with France which had not been negotiated for a long time as they didn't matter when they were part of the EU and they wanted things which were not compatible with the Good Friday agreement. As far as I know, this part is still not settled.
By the way, it was the border with Ireland that created issues, not the one with France
It was an admittedly "um actually"-adjacent comment, but I think still justified because Switzerland would have the exact same issues if they just renounced their treaties with the EU so they'd need to undergo as complex a negotiation as the UK had to
As a French, let me tell you there were and still are plenty of issues with France too notably regarding fishing rights and border control. France didn't threaten to turn off electricity to some of the Channel islands because everything was fine.
The UK could choose to leave and cut off all agreements concerning fishing rights, the tunnel, the border checks with france and it'd have been perfectly legal, if diplomatically damaging
With the Irish border there was/is the complication of the GFA, which prevented the same kind of approach
In practice they have few alternatives given their location as a land locked nation without the ability to feed their population without imports. All trade flows through or over territory of EU member states.
Tight CH-EU cooperation has been very beneficial for both sides and most of what we see is the usual political bickering.
That’s a large leap. It’s not in the EEA but is in the EFTA, so even fewer EU regulations apply than in Norway, for instance. Furthermore, the EU is a much larger political entity with its own parliament and other institutions, as I’m sure you’re aware, and these don’t have direct jurisdiction over most aspects of Swiss law as they would for EU member nations. It’s a more straightforward process for Switzerland to nullify its bilateral agreements (as is threatened seemingly every few years) than for something like Brexit.