Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Brexit

For discussion of all matters relating to the UK's departure from the European Union

Re: Brexit

Postby Hairyloon » Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:25 am

dls wrote:There is hoever no provision for withdrawing an article 50 notice. It is given and membrship ceases after two years, agreement or no.

Is it not an established principle that if a treaty does not expressly prohibit a thing, then that thing is allowed?
In which case, withdrawing the notice should put us back to where we were.

Or if someone were canny enough to make the case that we had failed in our constitutional requirements, then the notice would be invalid and there could be no question that the treaty terms were not changed.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9925
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Brexit

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:34 am

Here is Jolyon Maugham QC's primer on the Dublin case as to whether Article 50 is reversible.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6286
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Brexit

Postby dls » Sun Mar 12, 2017 4:35 pm

HL the treaty is not silent on the point. It tells you. The notice is givenand two years later we are out. In the meantime we all try hard to reach an agreement, but a failure does not stop the process. The exit can be suspended by unanimous agreement. No time is specified.

What, honestly do people think will be the result of Europe trying to get a qualified majority vote on any proposal? In the absence of such an agreement being on offer what do the idiots in Parliament think parliament can vote on?

What May is saying is that we want the best agreement we can get. If what is offered is better than no agreement then we can gladly take it. There remain however many possibilities for an offer effectively worse than leaving wih no agreement. If no offer is available to be accepted, or if the offer is worse than just leaving we have to retain the clear possibility of just leaving. How on earth can that be wrong?

Much EU rhetoric sounds as if that is what they want to offer, so that they can terrify the rest of their captive citizens into not being tempted to follow.

The real difficulty is that there are some who believe on exit at all and any costs, and there are some who believe in staying in / as close as possible / at all costs. For each group life is simple. They have put on their variously coloured face masks, and have no need of contact with reality.
The trick is first to spot those in each camp and have no credence in them.
We are then left with a very messy middle ground whose only job is to find the best way forward through an impossibly complex series of guesses about the future. By far the most important element in that is a mixture of lack of principle - pure objectivity - and a grim determination to make the very best of it. That latter part is what will create a future for us.

Looking at the 'Dublin Case article, he seems entirley to ignore (perhaps he hasn't read them) the three cases in Belfast and London in the High Court and in the Supreme Court - in each of which every single counsel and judge was of the opinion that Article 50 is not reversible. If article 50 was reversible, the entire logic of Mrs Miller's case disappears.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12136
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Brexit

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:19 pm

I think we may assume that Mr Maugham has read the Supreme Court's judgment in Miller. It would be most odd for him to have organised the crowdfunding effort for the case, and to have been one of the prime movers behind it, and not to have read the resulting judgment.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6286
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Brexit

Postby miner » Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:06 pm

dls wrote:

Much EU rhetoric sounds as if that is what they want to offer, so that they can terrify the rest of their captive citizens into not being tempted to follow.



And that sums up perfectly the attitude of Juncker, Barnier, Tusk, Verhofstadt and their shameful fellow-travellers.

Quite how anyone in the UK, even arch-Remaniacs, could now ever see it as desirable, advantageous or acceptable for the UK to continue be a part of the EUssr - given what we have established since 23 June 2016 is the EU hierarchy's true attitude to the UK - is simply beyond belief.

We always knew that the EU treated the UK with increasing disrespect over the years, but it has only come home to me since the Referendum just how deep and strong that disrespect actually is. One might have imagined that those idiots would at least have treated the UK with the consideration and respect appropriate to one of its only 4 or 5 contributors, but those EUrogoons were so stupid and so arrogant that they never seriously believed that the UK would go as far as to vote to ditch their failed project and rotten, sinking ship.
miner
 
Posts: 2341
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:22 am

Re: Brexit

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:19 pm

miner wrote:blah blah blah shameful fellow-travellers blah blah Remaniacs blah blah EUssr blah blah EUrogoons blah stupid and so arrogant blah.


Give it a rest, miner. You've already demonstrated that the Brexit case is driven by nothing more than rage, and that your side has nothing to contribute other than childish insults.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6286
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Brexit

Postby 3.14 » Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:59 pm

Hide in the noise. #hackerwisdom
User avatar
3.14
 
Posts: 2121
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Brexit

Postby miner » Sun Mar 12, 2017 9:21 pm

Smouldering Stoat wrote:
miner wrote:blah blah blah shameful fellow-travellers blah blah Remaniacs blah blah EUssr blah blah EUrogoons blah stupid and so arrogant blah.


Give it a rest, miner. You've already demonstrated that the Brexit case is driven by nothing more than rage, and that your side has nothing to contribute other than childish insults.


And precisely what does your side have to contribute?

You really talk some bollocks. My views are not predicated on rage at all as you so dishonestly suggest, but on the actualities of the EU situation based on my experiences as an international businessman and the conclusions I can draw from such experience. Have you ever been in control of an Industrial manufacturing-and-supply business?

Why don't you tell me and the rest of us what positives the EU would have to offer for the UK's or any other country's future (other than perhaps that of Germany, which is enjoying the major advantage of export trading in what for Germany is an artificially weak currency effectively controlled by itself)?

You seem naively blind to the reality of what the EU is and the way it's run!
miner
 
Posts: 2341
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:22 am

Re: Brexit

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Sun Mar 12, 2017 9:47 pm

My aunt grew up in a communist dictatorship. When she's finished wondering what happened to her family, she could teach you why your comparison between the EU and the USSR is beneath contempt.

I neither know nor care what you may have done: all I can see is a bitter old man. Consider yourself blocked.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6286
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Brexit

Postby miner » Sun Mar 12, 2017 10:19 pm

You're the one who needs to be blocked, Stoaty, and be deprived your "Moderator" status, for knowingly, deliberately and dishonesty attributing a quote to me when you knew perfectly well it was not made by me but generated by you in what was a personal attack by you against me.

Nothing I had said constituted a personal attack on anyone on this forum.

Smouldering Stoat wrote that miner wrote:

blah blah blah shameful fellow-travellers blah blah Remaniacs blah blah EUssr blah blah EUrogoons blah stupid and so arrogant blah.


when he/she knew that that was not what I had stated. Then he/she further abused their Moderator status by deciding to block me.

One might have imagined that a Moderator on this forum might have known better than to engage in such disreputable conduct.
miner
 
Posts: 2341
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:22 am

PreviousNext

Return to Brexit

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron