Do we have to leave the EU a QC says no
Discussion
marshalla said:
Starfighter said:
- Anything that is European Law no longer applies from the exit date but is would be possible to do a block incorporation via single act of parliament and then repeal or amend on a case by case basis at a later date.
ks. Even a stopped clock...AJL308 said:
Jonesy23 said:
EnglishTony said:
Ought to be a bit careful about wanting Article 50. There's a bit in there about holding a legally binding referendum. Which means including all citizens.
You have made this up.The text is:
"Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."
Which basically means that a state can choose to leave but does nothing to define what might be behind that decision. 'Constitutional requirements' really depends on the state in question and in the case of the UK I'd love to see where it says anything about a 'legally binding referendum' as opposed to (for example) just having the Prime Minster use the delegated Royal Prerogative which is actually the more likely route.
There might be some argument about whether the Royal Prerogative can actually be used in this case but that's a different argument & based on some interpretations rather than actual statute. I'm pretty sure the EU won't push the point.
Also, if the RP is used then I can see a legal challenge emanating from this Country. Out of 17m+ Remainers there will be plenty of people willing to put up the cash, not to mention corporations. A Court can't quezstion an Act of Parliament but it can with the RP The Case of Proclamations [/i]and the [i]Fire Brigades Union] of the 1990's shows that much.
It has to be an act of Parliament to be legal.
With these feet said:
You seem very confident. Unlike Labour there are 4 or 5 up for the position, I doubt any pro-eu MP would have the bare faced balls to reneg on Camerons decision. In fact, I wonder if CMD's final act may well be instigate Art 50...
Look above a few posts, one of the bullet points in there is no need for the approval for Art 50, it can be triggered by the PM.
I heard that R4 program as well. Yes, one guy said it was purely down to the PM to trigger Art.50 but he didn't state what legal reasoning was behind it. He certainly didn't address any of the points in the article linked to yesterday.Look above a few posts, one of the bullet points in there is no need for the approval for Art 50, it can be triggered by the PM.
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/06/27/nick-ba...
One QC's opinion is just that. Barristers make huge amounts of cash arguing this sort of stuff. I certainly don't think this is over. Not by a long way.
Einion Yrth said:
marshalla said:
Starfighter said:
- Anything that is European Law no longer applies from the exit date but is would be possible to do a block incorporation via single act of parliament and then repeal or amend on a case by case basis at a later date.
ks. Even a stopped clock...AJL308 said:
I heard that R4 program as well. Yes, one guy said it was purely down to the PM to trigger Art.50 but he didn't state what legal reasoning was behind it. He certainly didn't address any of the points in the article linked to yesterday.
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/06/27/nick-ba...
One QC's opinion is just that. Barristers make huge amounts of cash arguing this sort of stuff. I certainly don't think this is over. Not by a long way.
Barristers say two different things that can only be sorted after long and very expensive trial (plus expenses) shocker!https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/06/27/nick-ba...
One QC's opinion is just that. Barristers make huge amounts of cash arguing this sort of stuff. I certainly don't think this is over. Not by a long way.
AJL308 said:
I certainly don't think this is over. Not by a long way.
If you're one of those seriously worried by market volatility it really would be better if it were. A government that overrides the will of the majority of its people, of whom it asked an opinion, is unlikely to inspire confidence.Einion Yrth said:
AJL308 said:
I certainly don't think this is over. Not by a long way.
If you're one of those seriously worried by market volatility it really would be better if it were. A government that overrides the will of the majority of its people, of whom it asked an opinion, is unlikely to inspire confidence.General Election by Christmas.
Lib Dems walk it on a Remain portfolio.
1908 People's Budget scenario re-run.
Where the above constitutional crisis ended with the Parliament Act 1911, which provided a method to take the un-elected HoL out of the equation in specific circumstances, the end result of this will be some new method to deal with significant constitutional issues such as we are facing now.
We'll remain in the EU but probably a radically different one or one with two or more degrees is 'in'.
AJL308 said:
No, it isn't. However, if it needs an Act of Parliament to do it legally and Parliament won't pass such an Enactment then HMG is off the hook......a little bit.
General Election by Christmas.
Lib Dems walk it on a Remain portfolio.
1908 People's Budget scenario re-run.
Where the above constitutional crisis ended with the Parliament Act 1911, which provided a method to take the un-elected HoL out of the equation in specific circumstances, the end result of this will be some new method to deal with significant constitutional issues such as we are facing now.
We'll remain in the EU but probably a radically different one or one with two or more degrees is 'in'.
What are you smoking?!General Election by Christmas.
Lib Dems walk it on a Remain portfolio.
1908 People's Budget scenario re-run.
Where the above constitutional crisis ended with the Parliament Act 1911, which provided a method to take the un-elected HoL out of the equation in specific circumstances, the end result of this will be some new method to deal with significant constitutional issues such as we are facing now.
We'll remain in the EU but probably a radically different one or one with two or more degrees is 'in'.
marshalla said:
Einion Yrth said:
marshalla said:
Starfighter said:
- Anything that is European Law no longer applies from the exit date but is would be possible to do a block incorporation via single act of parliament and then repeal or amend on a case by case basis at a later date.
ks. Even a stopped clock...The point I was trying to make was that those laws that apply to the UK based on them being part of EU law (as distinct to those adoped by an act of parliament) would no longer apply on Brexit. These could be adopted on mass to enable continuity / stability and the reviewed at a later date.
Massive job mind you.
Starfighter said:
I voted remain based on the market / economy benefits of membership but that is besides th point.
The point I was trying to make was that those laws that apply to the UK based on them being part of EU law (as distinct to those adoped by an act of parliament) would no longer apply on Brexit. These could be adopted on mass to enable continuity / stability and the reviewed at a later date.
Massive job mind you.
AFAIK there is no "EU law" which applies without being interpreted and incorporated into national legislation, except the law surrounding the operation of the EU itself. Anything which affects trade, citizens etc. has to be enacted by each member state in an appropriate form for their constitution and legal system.The point I was trying to make was that those laws that apply to the UK based on them being part of EU law (as distinct to those adoped by an act of parliament) would no longer apply on Brexit. These could be adopted on mass to enable continuity / stability and the reviewed at a later date.
Massive job mind you.
So - it all applies now and will continue to apply until Parliament unpicks it from the UK's various Acts & Regulations/SIs from the last 40 years...
Einion Yrth said:
If you're one of those seriously worried by market volatility it really would be better if it were. A government that overrides the will of the majority of its people, of whom it asked an opinion, is unlikely to inspire confidence.
It is not unusual for governments to ignore the results of a referendum, particularly where it relates to the EU. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brex...
As you say, the markets are going to be volatile whilst the threat of significant change hangs over them. Unfortunately, there is no short cut here and both remain and leave camps are saying that there is no need for haste. I am amazed that neither side appear to have properly considered and explained the process to the electorate. It is a shambles.
lostkiwi said:
AJL308 said:
Jonesy23 said:
EnglishTony said:
Ought to be a bit careful about wanting Article 50. There's a bit in there about holding a legally binding referendum. Which means including all citizens.
You have made this up.The text is:
"Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."
Which basically means that a state can choose to leave but does nothing to define what might be behind that decision. 'Constitutional requirements' really depends on the state in question and in the case of the UK I'd love to see where it says anything about a 'legally binding referendum' as opposed to (for example) just having the Prime Minster use the delegated Royal Prerogative which is actually the more likely route.
There might be some argument about whether the Royal Prerogative can actually be used in this case but that's a different argument & based on some interpretations rather than actual statute. I'm pretty sure the EU won't push the point.
Also, if the RP is used then I can see a legal challenge emanating from this Country. Out of 17m+ Remainers there will be plenty of people willing to put up the cash, not to mention corporations. A Court can't quezstion an Act of Parliament but it can with the RP The Case of Proclamations [/i]and the [i]Fire Brigades Union] of the 1990's shows that much.
It has to be an act of Parliament to be legal.
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/06/27/nick-ba...
marshalla said:
AFAIK there is no "EU law" which applies without being interpreted and incorporated into national legislation, except the law surrounding the operation of the EU itself. Anything which affects trade, citizens etc. has to be enacted by each member state in an appropriate form for their constitution and legal system.
So - it all applies now and will continue to apply until Parliament unpicks it from the UK's various Acts & Regulations/SIs from the last 40 years...
EU Regulations become immediately applicable in all member states without national legislature being involved.So - it all applies now and will continue to apply until Parliament unpicks it from the UK's various Acts & Regulations/SIs from the last 40 years...
CrutyRammers said:
Dr Jekyll said:
EU Regulations become immediately applicable in all member states without national legislature being involved.
as opposed to directives,which are enacted by local legislation. 
Nevertheless, there's still a hell of a lot of UK law (and E,W,NI & S law) which needs to be reviewed, reassessed and redrafted to unpick the EU elements from it. It's not a job that can be done overnight, it'll take years. Nobody in their right minds would invoke Article 50 until they have a plan for sorting out the statute books as soon as the process is completed. Heck, they need to carry out the review just to work out what the bargaining position for Article 50 should look like on day 1.
Edited by marshalla on Wednesday 29th June 07:57
marshalla said:
CrutyRammers said:
Dr Jekyll said:
EU Regulations become immediately applicable in all member states without national legislature being involved.
as opposed to directives,which are enacted by local legislation. That's a lot of cost going into administration instead of the NHS, reduced taxes etc. The legal profession have been handed a goldmine.
lostkiwi said:
Quite right. I've seen estimates of 5 to 10 years to unpick it all.
That's a lot of cost going into administration instead of the NHS, reduced taxes etc. The legal profession have been handed a goldmine.
And while that's going on, we're still members and enacting new laws based on EU decisions, so we have to add extra work to the drafting process to make sure we can try to undo them if/when Article 50 finally takes effect.That's a lot of cost going into administration instead of the NHS, reduced taxes etc. The legal profession have been handed a goldmine.
Civil service expansion anybody ?
lostkiwi said:
Quite right. I've seen estimates of 5 to 10 years to unpick it all.
That's a lot of cost going into administration instead of the NHS, reduced taxes etc. The legal profession have been handed a goldmine.
Even if we won't unpick any of it we are no worse off in terms of rules than if we'd stayed in the EU, and we won't have new EU rules coming along to screw us up.That's a lot of cost going into administration instead of the NHS, reduced taxes etc. The legal profession have been handed a goldmine.
If the cost of removing a rule is greater than the benefit, we leave it alone.
Dr Jekyll said:
lostkiwi said:
Quite right. I've seen estimates of 5 to 10 years to unpick it all.
That's a lot of cost going into administration instead of the NHS, reduced taxes etc. The legal profession have been handed a goldmine.
Even if we won't unpick any of it we are no worse off in terms of rules than if we'd stayed in the EU, and we won't have new EU rules coming along to screw us up.That's a lot of cost going into administration instead of the NHS, reduced taxes etc. The legal profession have been handed a goldmine.
If the cost of removing a rule is greater than the benefit, we leave it alone.
This is what they've planned all along, now the cat's out of the bag.
Since starting this thread yesterday I have conversations with every client who came to see me, every one no exceptions, have told me how shocked they are that we are now in this position, some who voted out now realise that their expectations are not to be realised and are wishing that they have voted the other way, in my opinion we as a country have made a wrong decision and should be allowed to change our minds, so MP's please listen and act.
I know on this forum there will be disagreers but please no more rudeness this is a serious debate for all of us.
I know on this forum there will be disagreers but please no more rudeness this is a serious debate for all of us.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff