header-logo header-logo

10 February 2017 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7733 / Categories: Features , Public , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Art 50: the judgment (Pt 2)

nlj_7733_zander

Michael Zander QC picks out crucial passages from the dissenting Supreme Court justices on the triggering of Art 50

  • The judgments of Lords Reed, Carnwath and Hughes in R (Miller and another) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5.

Lord Reed (paras.153-242)

The effect of EU law in the UK is entirely dependent on the 1972 Act

“I entirely accept the importance in our constitutional law of the principle of Parliamentary supremacy over our domestic law…That principle does not, however, require that Parliament must enact an Act of Parliament before the UK can leave the EU. That is because the effect which Parliament has given to EU law in our domestic law, under the [European Communities Act 1972], is inherently conditional on the application of the EU treaties to the UK, and therefore on the UK’s membership of the EU. The Act imposes no requirement, and manifests no intention, in respect of the UK’s membership of the EU. It does not, therefore,

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

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Family law boutique expands London team with legal director hire

Ward Hadaway—Mike Gore

Ward Hadaway—Mike Gore

Firm enhances advisory capability with strategic risk specialist hire

Stewarts—Alexandra Lyons

Stewarts—Alexandra Lyons

Insurance and reinsurance specialist joins policyholder disputes practice as partner

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll