Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday November 04 2016, @05:55AM   Printer-friendly
from the the-government-is-"appealing"? dept.

Parliament must vote on whether the UK can start the process of leaving the EU, the High Court has ruled.

This means the government cannot trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty - beginning formal exit negotiations with the EU - on its own.

Theresa May says the referendum - and existing ministerial powers - mean MPs do not need to vote, but campaigners called this unconstitutional.

The government is appealing, with a further hearing expected next month.

A statement is to be made to MPs on Monday but the prime minister's official spokesman said the government had "no intention of letting" the judgement "derail Article 50 or the timetable we have set out. We are determined to continue with our plan".

Plebiscites only count when plebes vote the way they're told.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by choose another one on Friday November 04 2016, @11:56AM

    by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Friday November 04 2016, @11:56AM (#422446)

    The UK constitution is not unwritten, it is just written all over several centuries of case law. Sometimes I am surprised the US didn't do it this way because it seems that it ought to inherently make more money for lawyers, on the other hand they seem to make plenty (more) in the US anyway so what do I know.

    The issue is _what_ power it places it the hands of parliament, and what is with the crown (HMG). Treaty making has always been with HMG, law making with parliament. A notification under article 50 of the Lisbon treaty would appear to be the preserve of HMG, and there are parts of other EU treaties where parliament has passed laws that explicitly bind HMG to come back to parliament before acting under the treaty - why would that be necessary if HMG didn't have the authority to act on a treaty without parliamentary approval anyway?

    They key to the ruling is the assumption that article 50 is irrevocable and inevitably alters UK law (therefore requiring parliament) or not - and even the guy who wrote it says it is not, but the government chose not to argue that and therefore lost in court, possibly intentionally. Maybe the ECJ will settle that point.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by TheRaven on Friday November 04 2016, @12:34PM

    by TheRaven (270) on Friday November 04 2016, @12:34PM (#422454) Journal

    The UK constitution is not unwritten, it is just written all over several centuries of case law

    The technical term that you'll find in a politics textbook is 'written but not codified'.

    --
    sudo mod me up