First legal attempt to prevent Brexit set for preliminary hearing
First legal attempt to prevent Brexit set for preliminary hearing | Politics | The Guardian
First legal attempt to prevent Brexit set for preliminary hearing | Politics | The Guardian
The first legal attempt to prevent the prime minister initiating Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union is to be heard later this month.
A high court judge, Mr Justice Cranston, has set 19 July for a preliminary hearing of the judicial review challenge brought on behalf of the British citizen Deir Dos Santos.
The claim argues that only parliament – not the prime minister – can authorise the signing of article 50 of the Lisbon treaty, which begins the UK’s formal withdrawal process.
Other legal claims making a similar point are also being prepared by the law firm Mishcon de Reya. Brexit supporters staged a demonstration outside their London office on Thursday with a banner and placards declaring “‘Invoke article 50 now” and “‘Uphold the Brexit vote”.
The politically sensitive hearing will be heard by two judges in the divisional court. The Dos Santos claim argues that: “The result of the referendum is not legally binding in the sense that it is advisory only and there is no obligation [on the government] to give effect to the referendum decision. However the prime minister has stated on numerous occasions that it is his intention to give effect to the referendum decision and organise the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.
A high court judge, Mr Justice Cranston, has set 19 July for a preliminary hearing of the judicial review challenge brought on behalf of the British citizen Deir Dos Santos.
The claim argues that only parliament – not the prime minister – can authorise the signing of article 50 of the Lisbon treaty, which begins the UK’s formal withdrawal process.
Other legal claims making a similar point are also being prepared by the law firm Mishcon de Reya. Brexit supporters staged a demonstration outside their London office on Thursday with a banner and placards declaring “‘Invoke article 50 now” and “‘Uphold the Brexit vote”.
The politically sensitive hearing will be heard by two judges in the divisional court. The Dos Santos claim argues that: “The result of the referendum is not legally binding in the sense that it is advisory only and there is no obligation [on the government] to give effect to the referendum decision. However the prime minister has stated on numerous occasions that it is his intention to give effect to the referendum decision and organise the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.
In a separate development, Anthony Eskander, a criminal barrister at Church Court Chambers in London, has posted an opinion arguing that politicians supporting the Vote Leave campaign might have opened themselves up to legal action for alleged misrepresentations over claims that quitting the EU would allow an extra £350m to be spent on the NHS.
It claims politicians might have committed offences of misconduct in public office by promoting the £350m claim. The figure has been called “potentially misleading” by the independent UK Statistics Authority, for failing to take into account the UK’s rebate from the EU. Vote Leave denied during the referendum campaign that it was misleading the public.
It claims politicians might have committed offences of misconduct in public office by promoting the £350m claim. The figure has been called “potentially misleading” by the independent UK Statistics Authority, for failing to take into account the UK’s rebate from the EU. Vote Leave denied during the referendum campaign that it was misleading the public.
Comment