Article by the Law School’s Dr. Justin Borg-Barthet on the recent ‘Brexit Case’
This blog post is by Dr. Justin Borg-Barthet.
The High Court decision in Miller (the ‘Brexit case’) was essentially a public law case. The judgment (PDF) addresses the question of whether the royal prerogative can be exercised to repeal vested statutory rights. As is well known, the Court found in the negative. In the Court’s view, therefore, notice of the UK’s intention to withdraw from the European Union requires parliamentary consent.
But the judgment turns on a question of EU law, namely whether revocation of notice of intention to withdraw from the EU is possible. Here too the Court found in the negative. Both the claimants and government were of the view that once notice is given under Article 50 TEU, that notice is irrevocable. In other words, once the UK notifies the European Council that it wishes to withdraw, the UK cannot change its mind and…
View original post 908 more words