I hope that the in-house journals of every trade and profession in the UK are now running articles like this, containing an assessment of the consequences for each particular sector of the UK withdrawing from the EU. It is obvious from the newspapers that we are in danger of sleepwalking to the exit (to use the leader of the opposition’s phrase), and so we should begin to contemplate what it will mean for us as lawyers. If the consequences are serious enough, maybe some people will wake up with a start.

What Brexit will bring depends on what kind of withdrawal takes place: a messy or a velvet divorce. I suspect that the UK government wants the softest velvet, because - like the husband who fails to pull his weight in a marriage - it wants to keep the good bits of the relationship only, and none of the tough parts of living together. For this husband, the good bit is the single market which makes the whole of Europe open to UK business. Whether the wife will be prepared to give it as a parting gift will probably depend on how he behaves between now and then. But there are precedents for parts or all of the single market applying to countries outside the EU – either to the European Economic Area countries (Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein) or to Switzerland.

The jewels of the single market for the legal profession are the lawyers’ directives (temporary provision of services – 772/49/EEC, and permanent establishment – 98/5/EC). These allow solicitors to cross borders temporarily or permanently under our home title, and to practise everywhere and do practically everything in the EU. Another directive, and European Court of Justice decisions, permit access to the professional title of other member states on the easiest of terms. UK law firms have probably benefited most (out of the EU legal professions) from the single market. This is what is endangered by Brexit.

If the single market remains open to the UK, and I think that is the likeliest outcome, then there is no problem. If the single market does not remain open, negative consequences will slowly follow. Member states generally run pretty open markets for outside lawyers, and I don’t see any of them changing their rules and flinging out the UK firms, which are established in many of them, and usually commercially high-profile. But access to the courts and practice of local law, plus access to easy requalification, will probably be withdrawn.

More seriously for some might be the position of alternative business structures (ABSs). Currently, the right of ABSs to cross borders within the EU is within the power of individual member states, which can stop them at the border. But the right to stop them is thought to be presently under review. It is unlikely, though, that member states will allow ABSs from outside the EU (as a divorced UK will be) to practise within their borders. Depending on how successful the ABS model turns out, that might cause a problem.

The impact will be felt beyond lawyers’ practice rights, though. There have been reports recently that both the UK government and the Law Society are opposed to a European contract law. (My organisation, the CCBE, generally favours the proposal.) At present, the UK’s refusal to countenance it has a powerful effect. At every EU conference on the subject, there is a UK speaker thundering against it, and EU officials and politicians take the views of the UK seriously.

That will no longer be the case once the UK is out. And if there is eventually a single contract law in the remaining member states, it will have an impact on the influence and currency of the English common law as a default law used in contracts. That will affect solicitors’ pockets (never mind the pockets of the minority who are EU law specialists and will lose most of their market on a Brexit).

Loss of influence will be felt across a host of substantive laws, too - company, family, succession, crime - which will continue to apply in the EU to the million or so UK citizens living there. At present, the UK is by far the largest of the EU common law countries - Ireland and Cyprus (partly) are the others. I remember a Spanish MEP telling me years ago that, whenever there were struggles between the legal systems about how to resolve issues, it was surprising how often the common law won, despite being outnumbered. That will be lost.

I have concentrated here on the impact on us as lawyers, not as citizens. The impact on citizens will be much broader (travel, work, health, a range of rights). Have I forgotten anything? Are you tempted to wake up yet?

Jonathan Goldsmith is secretary general of the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe, which represents about one million European lawyers through its member bars and law societies. He blogs weekly for the Gazette on European affairs