header-logo header-logo

The case of the missing mandate

08 September 2017 / David Wolchover
Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail
nlj_7752_davies_1

David Wolchover contends that there is no mandate for the UK to be taken out of the EU & considers how the European Parliament may force a further referendum

Early in June Counsel Magazine online published an article in which I contended that the Prime Minister’s 29 March 2017 letter to President of the Council of Europe Donald Tusk did not, despite its claim, actually trigger Art 50 of the Treaty on European Union (“Article 50: the trigger that never was?”). My argument was and remains that no decision or equivalent declaration of intention has ever been made by the UK to leave the EU and the government enjoys no mandate to embark upon the journey to withdrawal.

Having further contemplated the issue I have formulated a further argument which arguably makes the case against the existence of a mandate for invoking Art 50 incontrovertible. The purpose of this article is to highlight that new argument, which is likely to provide the basis for discreet steps to be taken

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll