header-logo header-logo

Trigger happy?

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

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll