The Official Brexit Supreme Court thread.

[BlasterBates]

This.

May could say "yes good point Judges can you draft a framework for us. No need to waste government money on lawyers arguing obvious stuff".

Don't need for the judges to draft a framework, what the judges are saying is very simple. Article 50 needs a vote in parliament.

[Mordac]

I really don't understand why the government is persisting with this. Just accept that Parliament has a role in the running of the country and get on with it. It's not like Parliament is going to overturn the referendum result; it might just be the one LibDem MP that votes against. Article 50 by the back door is just going to create more division; much better to do it honestly and openly. IMO.

Have to ever heard of "precedent"? If the appeal is lost, the verdict can be used in future cases, which means in theory any government can be challenged in court using this ruling as a precedent. Christ, I wish I'd been a lawyer, they must be all raking it in, and most of them don't care who wins, they still get paid.

[PurpleGorilla]

Have to ever heard of "precedent"? If the appeal is lost, the verdict can be used in future cases, which means in theory any government can be challenged in court using this ruling as a precedent. Christ, I wish I'd been a lawyer, they must be all raking it in, and most of them don't care who wins, they still get paid.

The gov are perusing this to appease unhappy brexiters.

[NotAllThere]

I really don't understand why the government is persisting with this.

Incompetence and stupidity.

[Mordac]

The gov are perusing this to appease unhappy brexiters.

Possibly, but we enlightened "Leavers" know full well who is to blame for all this, it's the Remoaners, the sore losers, who only trust the will of the people when the people do as they are supposed to. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the EU were in some way helping to fund this "Kill Article 50 Campaign" or whatever it's called, or helping it in some other way.

[SueEllen]

Have to ever heard of "precedent"? If the appeal is lost, the verdict can be used in future cases, which means in theory any government can be challenged in court using this ruling as a precedent. Christ, I wish I'd been a lawyer, they must be all raking it in, and most of them don't care who wins, they still get paid.

It has happened before with different bills so this is no different.

[OwlHoot]

Another Brexit lie. Wigs are not worn in the Supreme Court.

No they wear new fancy EU-style brocade gowns.

Hopefully that will all change soon, and they'll be back to wearing their Santa outfits and full bodied wigs

[SueEllen]

No they wear new fancy EU-style brocade gowns.

Hopefully that will all change soon, and they'll be back to wearing their Santa outfits and full bodied wigs

Nah the entire point of the gowns is to look good on telly. If they wear wigs they look like they have gone back to days gone by.

[vetran]

maybe the bremoaners will winn.

Then all those treaties we signed via royal prerogative come undone..

Rome, Maastricht, Lisbon......

[OwlHoot]

If they wear wigs they look like they have gone back to days gone by.

Huh? You're saying that as if it's a bad thing.