header-logo header-logo

12 August 2016 / Richard Lang
Issue: 7711 / Categories: Opinion , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Trigger happy?

The need for Parliament’s consent to trigger Art 50 is a matter of EU Law, says Richard Lang

Paragraph 1 of Art 50 of the Treaty on European Union, governing voluntary withdrawal of a member state from the EU, reads: “Any member state may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.” This right is followed in the next paragraph by an obligation: “A member state which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention.” This contribution addresses a single hypothetical scenario, namely, one in which Theresa May triggers Art 50 without prior parliamentary approval, asking: If she did this, would she be acting illegally? Several legal commentators have now offered answers to this question, the majority in the affirmative, and last month a legal action began by which the claimants wish to enjoin May from so acting. Thus the judges will have the final say. But which judges?

Academic consensus

First things first. The academic consensus is that triggering Art 50 is the only legal way for

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

NLJ Career Profile: Mark Hastings, Quillon Law

NLJ Career Profile: Mark Hastings, Quillon Law

Mark Hastings, founding partner of Quillon Law, on turning dreams into reality and pushing back on preconceptions about partnership

Kingsley Napley—Silvia Devecchi

Kingsley Napley—Silvia Devecchi

New family law partner for Italian and international clients appointed

Mishcon de Reya—Susannah Kintish

Mishcon de Reya—Susannah Kintish

Firm elects new chair of tier 1 ranked employment department

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll