Alternatively it can't be reversed by the prerogative either - in the let's turn out the lights event that Tim Farron becomes PM!

Yes some of us have been saying this. BUT government can't go to ECJ to ask for a ruling with any credibility so they are having to rely on the principle it is irrevocable. Supreme Court could actually refer decision to ECJ. If ECJ says it can be untriggered it takes pressure off Parliament and their fear it will be manoeuvred into agreeing any old deal as better than the suicide option.

No agreement? Means we leave with no deal. Not that I want one.

Not if article 50 can be untriggered. A vote of no confidence in government brings about an election. A government who cannot get their Brexit deal through Parliament is going to have to go to the country.

All these challenges on Brexit.. the goverment will be locked into legal battles for years because the courts keep letting people think they have a chance with the high court ruling. It's opened a can of worms for every tom, dick and harry to fancy their chances.

Brexit hasn't even got off the ground yet.

Bad news for you then - the irish case has hit its funding target

https://www.crowdjustice.org/case/brexit-for-the-100/

'I am from a working class family but am now a QC?' What an opening line - I bet she isn't living a working class lifestyle on a QCs salary! More like I am a rich lawyer now and I want to find ways to overturn the vote of the working class 'plebs'.

Can't win at the ballot box - so let's use our wealth to effectively overturn the democratic vote in the courts and delay and delay the implementation of Brexit or even reverse it. Cos in the end this is what this really is all about.

Could they not do something more useful with their cash - for example Jill Stein needs more money in her attempts to overturn the election result in America.

She is actually a he. If you don't like the legal process fight it. Maybe the UK can spare some of that £350mil a week.

Yes - cos it is the poor old taxpayer that will pick up the bill for these cases.

Sorry - Jo tends to be the shorthand term women use for Joanne or Josephine etc whereas Joe is usually the shorthand term men use for Joseph. So it was an honest mistake.

Either way the comments are a bit rich - a bit like a QC who pretends they are still a member of the working class.

Apparently he's called Jolyon. Now that's a really common working class name on the council estates of south Manchester where I grew up closely followed by Tarquin!

Well Emily Thornberry apparently lived on a council estate for a while - apparently while her mother was the Lord Mayor of the town she lived in (maybe that's how they got a council house?!) and her dad was a diplomat at the United Nations!

Crowd funding the legal progfessions pockets more like.


Closely followed by Peregrin.

Not if the result is that, if it needed clarified in the first place, that A50 is not reversible.

If those frothing at the mouth calmed down a bit then they'd realize that if the constitutional requirements are nailed down and there's an official verdict from the EU that it can't be withdrawn then their fears that after two or more years the UK will not withdraw from the EU might be lessened.

If A50 is reversible then another in/out referendum on the deal is then possible.

Those that want to stay in would pressurise for such a vote, and parties involved in the negotiations could try to produce a deal that the British public would reject.

I think almost everyone has got past the bit about legal challenges stopping Brexit and have accepted that only way to reverse the decision is for the people to do so in a second vote. Everything else would be seen as too undemocratic. So this is about preparing the ground for the possibility of a second vote.

But if A50 is irrevesible then there is no point in another referendum since we'd be out regardless.
Which is why this action through the Irish courts is a risky strategy for remain.

The government has taken the position in Court that its irreversible. So there can't be a second referendum.

Should the ECJ rule that A50 is reversible it overturns the government's position thus allowing another in/out referendum.

If Remain really want to stop us leaving then they really don't have another method that people will accept.

The more challenges the better!

Yes it is risky I have some doubts on the motives of the person who is mounting it to be honest.


It may allow it but it won't happen.

It seems A50 isn't reversible based on what it says in the treaty and in particular clause 5 which says.
There is no mention of revocation of A50 so at best it would seem a member's withdrawal could, with the agreement of the leaving member and remaining members, be suspended but not through a unilateral revocation of A50.

This briefing paper is an interesting read and actually says there is no legal impediment to the EU and a member state conducting informal talks ahead of A50 being invoked. It also says EU negotiations don't necessarily have to be conducted by the European Commission.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegDat...)577971_EN.pdf

Or possibly until she was attacked for doing so Miller genuinely wanted to make sure all the T's were crossed and I's dotted as being the best guarantee that Brexit actually took place.