Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Section Leader
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    There is a view that Article 50 has already been triggered. Article 50 says:

    "A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention."

    The communique from Tuesday's Council says:

    "The UK Prime Minister informed the European Council about the outcome of the referendum in the UK"
    Oopsie! (If that's the case...)
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    The EU assumes we can back out. If this was an English legal document, we couldn't. I think we probably can back out,

    There is a view that Article 50 has already been triggered. Article 50 says:

    "A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention."

    The communique from Tuesday's Council says:

    "The UK Prime Minister informed the European Council about the outcome of the referendum in the UK"
    It's really quite frightening how there isn't a consensus among legal experts or politicians as to what's going on in the UK's most seismic policy change in decades

    It is also in itself evidence of how ineffectual the EU is in spite of mountains of bureaucracy
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I love the good old guardian
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fenice)
    It's really quite frightening how there isn't a consensus among legal experts or politicians as to what's going on in the UK's most seismic policy change in decades

    It is also in itself evidence of how ineffectual the EU is in spite of mountains of bureaucracy
    I am not sure the fault here is with the EU rather than the UK government.

    There is a saying that lawyers should be on tap but not on top and I agree with that.

    But increasingly, and not just over this, either the government legal service is not being consulted or it is just being a mirror of politicians' desires.

    If someone had consulted me over this, I would have asked whether Cameron could control the text of the communiqué. If the answer was "yes" then I would have said that a UK lawyer should review the draft communiqué. If the answer was "no", then an oral communication was too risky. Immediately before the Council the UK should deliver a diplomatic note explaining that "the British people had voted in a referendum to leave the EU but under the UK's constitutional order, it was for the government of the day to decide to withdraw from the EU. Owing to the resignation of the Prime Minister, that task would fall to the government led by the new Prime Minister who would decide how to implement the will of the British people. An article 50 notification was not presently being given and any article 50 notification would be given by diplomatic note only." The benefit of a diplomatic note was that the UK had complete control over the text. Moreover it could be made clear that no future oral statement was intended to invoke article 50.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    That makes no sense. If remain voters took them literally surely they would have then been convinced to vote Leave, because they would be wanting the NHS to get the money.
    No, you choose to take it literally post referendum to push forward your agenda.

    It's not exactly cherry picking when one was on your ****ing battlebus, and the other was the centrepiece of millions of doordrop communications.
    Its cherry picking when you choose to focus on that post referendum to suit your agenda but do not focus on the lies the remain campaign told. Why not? We all know why. As for my battlebus? No. Calm down and stop being emotionally enraged. It would be nice to have a rational discussion with a millennial without them crying in an emotional fit every time someone disagrees with them. That bus did not represent me or a large proportion of those who wanted to leave, but dont let facts get in the way of your agenda.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    I love that TSR awards your posts with a special*

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    that is.... progress

    :dontknow:

    maybe Pantyjanet Crone has one as well **
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    The gov has to approve it, and it must be in the best interests of the country,
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    lmao what absolute nonsense!
    almost as nonsensical as sturgeon claiming scotland could veto brexit
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rock Fan)
    Anyone with half a brain cell would realised Farage was lying when he said the NHS would get £350million, think the Guardian is really clutching at straws with the article.
    Have you got a source for the bolded?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:



    (Original post by similarBlank)
    Remainians who are still trying to block Brexit:

    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    There are two types of referendum that have been held by the UK Government, pre-legislative (held before proposed legislation is passed) and post-legislative (held after legislation is passed). To date both the previous two UK-wide referendums in 1975 and 2011 were post-legislative. Referendums are not legally binding, so legally the Government can ignore the results; for example, even if the result of a pre-legislative referendum were a majority of "No" for a proposed law, Parliament could pass it anyway, because parliament is sovereign.
    • Section Leader
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by Theplace)
    There are two types of referendum that have been held by the UK Government, pre-legislative (held before proposed legislation is passed) and post-legislative (held after legislation is passed). To date both the previous two UK-wide referendums in 1975 and 2011 were post-legislative. Referendums are not legally binding, so legally the Government can ignore the results; for example, even if the result of a pre-legislative referendum were a majority of "No" for a proposed law, Parliament could pass it anyway, because parliament is sovereign.
    Awkward truth about sovereignty...
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    A referendum was called by PM Cameron to ask voters their opinion, it is advisory,,at most influential, and needs consent by parliament before articlle 50 is invoked.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I am not sure the fault here is with the EU rather than the UK government.

    There is a saying that lawyers should be on tap but not on top and I agree with that.

    But increasingly, and not just over this, either the government legal service is not being consulted or it is just being a mirror of politicians' desires.

    If someone had consulted me over this, I would have asked whether Cameron could control the text of the communiqué. If the answer was "yes" then I would have said that a UK lawyer should review the draft communiqué. If the answer was "no", then an oral communication was too risky. Immediately before the Council the UK should deliver a diplomatic note explaining that "the British people had voted in a referendum to leave the EU but under the UK's constitutional order, it was for the government of the day to decide to withdraw from the EU. Owing to the resignation of the Prime Minister, that task would fall to the government led by the new Prime Minister who would decide how to implement the will of the British people. An article 50 notification was not presently being given and any article 50 notification would be given by diplomatic note only." The benefit of a diplomatic note was that the UK had complete control over the text. Moreover it could be made clear that no future oral statement was intended to invoke article 50.
    An internal red is of no concern or interes to the eu, It is an internal matter for the UK. If,you vote not to have cornflakes for breakfast at home, do you think the eu has the right to comment ot take it that the government is banning cornflakes?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Theplace)
    An internal red is of no concern or interes to the eu, It is an internal matter for the UK. If,you vote not to have cornflakes for breakfast at home, do you think the eu has the right to comment ot take it that the government is banning cornflakes?
    They are not independent of one another.

    The Lisbon Treaty is a part of UK law and Article 50 says that a state may withdraw in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

    It also says that a state that decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council.

    Article 50 does not contemplate the possibility of a state having decided to withdraw but with the two year period not running.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Interesting piece in The Guardian

    "The circumstances surrounding the EU referendum are so bizarre, so chaotic and so impassioned that it is easy to overlook the fact that the UK’s withdrawal from the union would simply consist of two administrative acts performed by the government, acts that are subject to well-settled forms of legal analysis and legal evaluation. The government decides that the UK will withdraw from the EU; and the government notifies the European council of that intention.

    There is strong reason to believe that the government’s withdrawal decision would be unlawful, and hence that the notification would be invalid..."

    read on : https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...u-uk?CMP=fb_gu

    Thoughts? nulli tertius and any other legal folks...

    NB the author is not a journo. He's a professor of international public law
    Most importantly, it has to be approved by parliament to be passed and must be in the best interest of the country before activating article 50. Until then limbo.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    It was premature of the press to announce an exit from the EU over an internal advisory, non binding questionnaire.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fenice)
    It's really quite frightening how there isn't a consensus among legal experts or politicians as to what's going on in the UK's most seismic policy change in decades

    It is also in itself evidence of how ineffectual the EU is in spite of mountains of bureaucracy
    You don't need a consensus.
    It is law 101.
    A referendum is advisory, But if influential enough will go before parliament who will decide if it is in the best interests of the country, and then will give it approval, or assent ,and then article 50 can be invoked if the PM at that time decides to do so.
    All Cameron promised in his manifesto was a referendum. Even that is being challenged because it was to control his oven split party, not at the request of the people. Additionally, there is misrep upon which people based their votes, a material breach. A general election can also prevent it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Theplace)
    The gov has to approve it, and it must be in the best interests of the country,
    "and it must be in the best interests of our country"
    there is no law that says that, you're making this up
    and this *is* in the best interests of our country, because we're a democracy. democracy is in the best interests of our country.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    This is really entertaining, I thought the butthurt would subside after a few days.
    Grow up.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rock Fan)
    Anyone with half a brain cell would realised Farage was lying when he said the NHS would get £350million, think the Guardian is really clutching at straws with the article.
    This was obvious to me too. I just don't get politics. No one talks about the real issues. Surely this makes it far more difficult because you have to go out way further on supporting ********.

    EU referendum, no one really talked about mass immigration or the housing crisis but this was at the core of it. Just prattling on about the NHS as usual, the economy and sovereignty.

    Sadiq Khan vote, no one talked about his racist views and policies. Instead they went on about his ties to Islamic extremists which was inconclusive at best.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.