Ministers could have to put through a full Act of Parliament before starting Brexit talks, Supreme Court told
MINISTERS could have to put through a full Act of Parliament through both the House of Commons and the House of Lords before triggering Brexit, the Supreme Court heard today.
On day three of the case, which will decide whether Theresa May can trigger Brexit alone or needs a vote from MPs, Lord Pannick QC said legislation would be needed to go through both Houses of Parliament, which could set the Brexit process back weeks.
In his concluding remarks to the court, he said: "the law is not altered by a motion in parliament. A motion in parliament cannot effect the legal issue in this case.”
But earlier this week the Government lawyer James Eadie had said that if it lost the appeal, ministers would put down a bill containing just a "one line" statement, which would be quicker.
Lord Pannick said that only legislation could repeal the legislation that got Britain into the EU in the first place.
Earlier today the anti-Brexit lawyer, acting on behalf of businesswoman Gina Miller, was slapped down in court by suggesting that the referendum had no legal backing.
Lord Pannick said that there were no powers that could nullify the 1972 Act that took Britain into the EU.
He said that the referendum was not legally binding, and it was not enough to start Brexit negotiations.
But the argument raised eyebrows, and Lord Neuberger suggested that the Referendum Act may have been enough to concede power to the people.
“It would be a bit surprising if the referendum act and the referendum had no effect in law,” he said.
The news comes as a 55-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated malicious communications over threats made online to Ms Miller, 51, the businesswoman behind the Brexit legal challenge.
Yesterday the court heard that Scotland and Northern Ireland can’t stop the Government from triggering Article 50 and kicking off Brexit talks.
It also emerged that Theresa May will HAVE to put down a bill in Parliament on Article 50 if the Government loses the Brexit appeal.
Government lawyer James Eadie admitted that it would require “parliamentary legislation” for MPs to declare their support of starting the process of leaving the EU.
What is going on in the Article 50 Supreme Court case?
What’s it about?
THE hearing is all about who decides when and how Britain leaves the EU, the Government, Parliament or the people. The public voted for Brexit in the referendum but High Court judges ruled that MPs and lords should get a vote before the PM can trigger Article 50, which begins our exit. The Government is challenging that ruling.
Who’s involved?
THE original case was brought by an 11-strong group of Remainers led by financier Gina Miller. Her supporters raised £170,000 online to launch the hearing in October. Today’s appeal is a fight between lawyers for the Government, led by Attorney General Jeremy Wright, above, and the 11, who are represented by Dominic Chambers, QC.
What’s next?
THE judges are expected to deliver their decision in the New Year. If the appeal is allowed, the PM can start the Brexit process before the end of March as planned. But if not, it will throw her timetable into chaos. If MPs and peers start deliberately stalling the process, she may have no option but to call a snap General Election.
Mrs May is fighting to overturn the High Court ruling that she fears could end up delaying Brexit for months.
The judges’ decision last month gave MPs the right to authorise ‘Article 50’ talks to leave the EU.
The 11 judges will make a decision in the new year.
And the Government have attempted to stave off a rebellion on their backbenches today by agreeing to publish a Brexit plan.
But a last minute amendment from the Prime Minister said she WOULD put out some plans, but challenged MPs to back triggering Article 50 too. MPs will vote on it later today.
The court has now adjourned for the day and will resume tomorrow.
READ MORE:
- What is the Article 50 Appeal?
- Theresa May will still trigger Article 50 by end of March 2017 despite High Court defeat, says No10
- Brexit ‘could be delayed for FOUR YEARS by Remainers, warns QC
- Theresa May’s plan for leaving the EU in tatters after judges rule Parliament needs approval on Article 50 in Brexit legal challenge
- What is Article 50, why is it key to EU Brexit and will Parliament get to vote on it?
- Theresa May uses first Tory conference speech as PM to vow Britain will quit the EU by April 2019
- Conservatives could QUADRUPLE their majority in the Commons if Theresa May called a snap election