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

Supreme Court hears Brexit case

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

Re: Supreme Court hears Brexit case

Postby dls » Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:25 am

In other words, Mtr Grayling doesn't quite support the idea that if the MPs are idiotic/cowardly enough to vote for a referendum, they should see themselves as stuck with its results.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12195
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Supreme Court hears Brexit case

Postby Hairyloon » Sun Jan 29, 2017 10:47 am

dls wrote:In other words, Mtr Grayling doesn't quite support the idea that if the MPs are idiotic/cowardly enough to vote for a referendum, they should see themselves as stuck with its results.

The idea is built on sound principles, but forgets one or two things...

The professor sets out his arguments in more detail here for anyone who is interested.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Supreme Court hears Brexit case

Postby Hairyloon » Tue Feb 07, 2017 2:40 pm

The Government has refused to say how much public money it spent on its failed Supreme Court challenge over Article 50 - because it does not know the “electricity costs of rooms used for preparing for the case” or “the cost of the printing of materials”, The Independent can reveal.

The Department for Exiting the European Union admitted it had "no estimates" of how much of taxpayers' money had been spent on fighting the months-long legal battle because it has not kept track of staffing costs, in response to a Freedom of Information request.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 65461.html

OK, I know they had a truckload of papers, but does printing really make up a substantial amount of a legal bill?
Obviously, if they have only hired the office intern to prepare the case, then the hourly rate should be relatively low, but I would have expected them to hire somebody reasonably well experienced and therefore expensive. :?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Supreme Court hears Brexit case

Postby atticus » Tue Feb 07, 2017 2:47 pm

This suggests that advantage has been taken of a poorly focussed question.

And yes, the cost of printing can be "substantial". But probably not even approaching 10% of the overall cost.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19704
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Supreme Court hears Brexit case

Postby Hairyloon » Tue Feb 07, 2017 2:51 pm

atticus wrote:And yes, the cost of printing can be "substantial". But probably not even approaching 10% of the overall cost.

Damn, thought "significant" typed "substantial". Though I would have to concede that 10% is not insignificant. Have I also underestimated electricity?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Previous

Return to Brexit

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest