header-logo header-logo

02 February 2017 / David Greene
Issue: 7732 / Categories: Opinion , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Brexit: where do we stand?

nlj_7732_greene

Fresh from the Miller & Dos Santos case, David Greene provides an update on Brexit

The week since the Supreme Court’s decision on Art 50 fulfils all the clichés of the legal and political world. As far as the rule of law is concerned the world is set to right. The judiciary have now handed over the reins to Parliament as Parliament is confirmed as the core of our parliamentary democracy.

For all those involved in the case we move back to the day job. Never will there be case like it in my practice. As with so much in life our involvement arose from being in the right place at the right time but now the world moves on.

Ongoing litigation

It may not be the end of the court’s involvement in the Brexit process. There is currently a claim brought of similar nature to the Art 50 argument but this time relating to Art 127 of the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement. This is the agreement between the EU nations and three of

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll