Police Arrest Man Over Threats to UK Brexit Lawsuit Claimant

Lawyers in the case have said they expect the court will give its judgment in late January.

James Eadie QC makes his case to the Supreme Court justices.

“It seems to be of some relevance to ask ourselves, what is Parliament’s role going to be between now and the end of the two years? Has there been anything else?”

“Labour’s focus has always been on getting an assurance from the Government that a basic plan for Brexit will be published before Article 50 is invoked…”

Mr Davis said: “Many on the benches opposite pay lip service to respective the result of the referendum, whilst at the same time trying to find new ways to thwart and delay”.

Supreme Court President David Neuberger reflected out loud on the assertion that the referendum was merely advisory.

Prime Minister Theresa May plans to launch European Union exit talks by the end of March using ancient powers known as royal prerogative, which enable governments to join or leave worldwide treaties.

THE battle over Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union will now be between Theresa May’s “red, white and blue Brexit versus the Tartan Remain”, Pete Wishart, the SNP’s Shadow Commons Leader, has insisted as he branded the Supreme Court case “a circus”.

Not giving parliament the chance, before Article 50 is invoked, to say where it thinks these negotiations should end up is, at its core, undemocratic, unconstitutional and likely to exacerbate the divisions in our society to which the referendum gave rise.

Lord Pannick said it was in fact the view of Brexit Secretary David Davis, who is leading the Government’s appeal against the High Court ruling, that some legislation “simply will not work” on exit from the EU.

Law Officer for the Welsh Assembly Richard Gordon QC told the court flaws in the Government’s plans are so obvious “a six-year-old child could see them”.

James Eadie QC, for the Government, has insisted that it does have the legal power to use the prerogative to trigger Britain’s exit from the European Union and has rejected the suggestion that its Brexit strategy was an “affront” to parliamentary sovereignty. Given the political sensitivities this approach may tempt the Court, as long as it is content that the right answer can be reached on other grounds. Prerogative powers have been used for centuries — originally by monarchs, now by politicians — to join or leave global treaties without a vote in Parliament.

Former Cabinet minister and leave campaigner Iain Duncan Smith welcomed the vote as an “historic moment”, claiming it had called Labour’s bluff. Two other top judges – Master of the Rolls Sir Terence Etherton and Lord Justice Sales – agreed.

But the claimants, led by investment fund manager Gina Miller, argue that parliament must be consulted before approving any changes to domestic laws and rights. Our case has nothing to do with politics – it concerns legal process and the constitution.

“We will publish, before Article 50 is triggered, a statement about our negotiating strategy and objectives as the prime minister said yesterday”, he told the Commons. “We do not believe another Act of Parliament is necessary”.

“The Brexit vote split the UK”.

Brexit-backing Conservative MP Dominic Raab said the Lib Dems’ decision to oppose the motion was “irresponsible and profoundly anti-democratic”. She is attending this week’s Supreme Court case with bodyguards. This is recognised by the Lord Advocate in his written case, which says that “if the UK Parliament were to choose to pass an Act of Parliament without the consent of the Scottish Parliament, the courts could not decline to recognise the validity of the resulting Act”.