Art 50: the clash of the Brexit case arguments

Michael Zander QC reviews the written cases of the government & the lead claimants in next week’s Supreme Court hearing

The two sides have opposite approaches to the relevant materials, each backed by many authorities and strong arguments.
The hearing is scheduled to last four days from 5 December with judgment expected in January.

The government’s appeal against the Divisional Court’s unanimous ruling in Miller and Dos Santos v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin), [2016] All ER (D) 19 (Nov) opens on Monday (5 December 2016), for the first time with all 11 justices sitting.

The government (appellant) will again be represented by the attorney general and Mr J Eadie QC. The lead claimants (now the respondents) will again be represented by Lord Pannick QC (both written cases can be accessed here).

The government’s case is that triggering Art 50 is within the executive’s power acting on the international plane under the royal prerogative and that “the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

Art 50: the clash of the Brexit case arguments

Issue: 7725 / Categories: Features , Public , Brexit , EU

Michael Zander QC reviews the written cases of the government & the lead claimants in next week’s Supreme Court hearing

The two sides have opposite approaches to the relevant materials, each backed by many authorities and strong arguments.
The hearing is scheduled to last four days from 5 December with judgment expected in January.

The government’s case is that triggering Art 50 is within the executive’s power acting on the international plane under the royal prerogative

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up