cheese_puff

Judges rule on Brexit

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37857785

Ok, so I accept that I'm probably biased since I voted to stay in, but I have to say that I agree with that decision. It seems right that the PM cannot impose whatever ruling that they decide on without a parliamentary vote, especially on something that is so important as this and something where the balance of public opinion was so close.

Supreme Court to rule on 7/8 Dec.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted to leave and hope HMG wins its decision.

If Parliament does vote on the issue I would imagine a great many MPs would find it hard to go against the will of the people as expressed in the referenduM and would vote to trugger Article 50. However, you never know.

By going back on the decision to leave the EU we would be failing to look to the long term and I am afraid my view would be that we would deserve all we get when the EU and its currency falls appart in the not too distant future.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The judges have ruled and I am split whether there should have been found necessary to go to law. There is what is called 'The Royal Perogative' where it is can be used in situations such as this. Are they not undermining an alternative way of coming to a decision to expediate decisions?

 

However if the eventual decision by MP's goes against the will of the population then it will be a travesty of natural justice. I just hope that in the run up to the debate, there is non of the inflated exageration from either side and they play clean and fair.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The judges have ruled and I am split whether there should have been found necessary to go to law. There is what is called 'The Royal Perogative' where it is can be used in situations such as this. Are they not undermining an alternative way of coming to a decision to expediate decisions?

 

However if the eventual decision by MP's goes against the will of the population then it will be a travesty of natural justice. I just hope that in the run up to the debate, there is non of the inflated exageration from either side and they play clean and fair.

Doubt if there will be much of `clean and fair.'

If those concerned had been of that mindset they would have accepted the result of the Referendum.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The legal challenge seems to have been funded by the south American wife of a major venture capitalist - so, clearly, self-interest wasn't at play ........ Not :angry:  This woman has become the "darling" of the "remainers" - which begs the question whether being a "remainer" means that you can only have self-interest at heart rather than the greater good. Maybe I am being unfair but I still find it objectionable that the "remainers" cannot accept a majority democratic decision - mind you, it's very "European" to try to re-run events until they get the answer they wish. 

 

The fact is that the majority of the electorate voted to leave the EU and, frankly, that should be that - a clear instruction to the sitting government to take the necessary action to fulfill the wishes of the majority of the people. I hope the government wins its appeal but, if there is a Parliamentary vote - there is a clear understanding by MPs that if they go against the wishes of the electorate, they will be removed at the next election.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguably self-interest was at the heart of practically every vote, and is at the heart of practically every vote made.

 

Whoever paid for the legal challenge is largely irrelevant - the Court has decided on a principle of Law - some might say that had the challenge not been paid for, based upon the ruling of the Court, something illegal made have taken place.........I'm sure nobody would want that.  Would they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it rather amusing that one of the main reasons for voting to Leave was the issue of Parliamentary Sovereignty, and this is exactly that, as was cited by the ruling judge.

A British Parliament deciding on a British issue affecting British people after a decision was made by a British judge.

Personally I can't think of anything fairer.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and for those people signed up to the Pension Challenge, this must be good news, as it's clear the Government can be defeated and aren't always right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguably self-interest was at the heart of practically every vote, and is at the heart of practically every vote made.

 

Whoever paid for the legal challenge is largely irrelevant - the Court has decided on a principle of Law - some might say that had the challenge not been paid for, based upon the ruling of the Court, something illegal made have taken place.........I'm sure nobody would want that.  Would they?

What illegality do you think may have occurred?

What I think has clearly happened here is that the court has affirmed that it would be ultra vires for HMG to trigger Article 50 without consulting Parliament. Courts exist for the purpose of making such decisions and we shall just have to see how the scenario pans out in the long term. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguably self-interest was at the heart of practically every vote, and is at the heart of practically every vote made.

 

Whoever paid for the legal challenge is largely irrelevant - the Court has decided on a principle of Law - some might say that had the challenge not been paid for, based upon the ruling of the Court, something illegal made have taken place.........I'm sure nobody would want that.  Would they?

 

I understand your view but I am not sure that the exercise of "The Royal Prerogative", which seems to have been what the Government was considering, can be considered "illegal" as it is an instrument that, inter-alia, can be used to sever international agreements / treaties and The Treaty of Rome and the other EU agreements presumably are no different.

 

In terms of self-interest, I know from very immediate impact that the electorate's decision would have pain - my UK pensions have now all reduced in local value by more than 17% but that is a price I and others have to pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What illegality do you think may have occurred?

What I think has clearly happened here is that the court has affirmed that it would be ultra vires for HMG to trigger Article 50 without consulting Parliament. Courts exist for the purpose of making such decisions and we shall just have to see how the scenario pans out in the long term. 

 

Hasn't the Court just said that Parliament must be consulted before triggering Article 50?  So, without this ruling, had Article 50 been triggered, then wouldn't that have made it a bit illegal/unconstitutional to trigger it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with OAH on one point - the vote was to leave the EU, so leave we should.  IF we could just give it some time so that I can put as much money under my mattress as possible, or buy gold, then that'd be great.......

 

 

That would mean - no more EU laws, any that are in effect here should cease to matter.  No free movement/immigration.  No more money sent to the EU.  We should leave completely.  Start again with trade agreements.  Obviously that will also mean that we won't need any more MEPs......

 

For as much as anybody understood what Brexit actually meant (any/all of the above and more) when they voted, then at the very least, people should have known what the potential was.  I hate to be churlish, but the NHS could really do with £350 million a week...........maybe then I'd get a bloody ambulance when somebody is ill in front of me.........

 

Anyway.  Interesting times and decision.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/mailonline-online-attacks-brexit-judge-for-being-openly-gay_uk_581b344ee4b0ab6e4c1ba5ff?utm_hp_ref=uk

 

Not just the Remainers who have a problem with a decision not going their own way..............dear oh dear.

 

Some of the Twitter comments are hilarious though.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 176 hidden replies in this thread that you do not currently have access to as a Guest User of our forum. To unlock the forum register for an account for FREE today by clicking HERE

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.