Britex getting more complicated with Supreme Court involvement

In a case of “great constitutional importance”, the Supreme Court has heard a claim that it is for the British Government to exercise prerogative powers in the conduct of the UK’s affairs on the global plane. A run-of-the-mill Supreme Court case is generally heard by only five justices – though always an odd-number to ensure a tie-breaking vote.

Speaking this afternoon on these laws, Eadie referred to the 2015 European Referendum Act which left the Royal Prerogative powers on Brexit with the government, not parliament.

Lord Pannick is representing Gina Miller, an investment fund manager and philanthropist, who was the lead claimant in the group that won the historic High Court ruling blocking the use of the prerogative.

The High Court ruled last month that Article 50 can not be triggered without a Westminster vote.

Some supporters of Brexit think the judges are exceeding their authority by considering the case at all.

May avoided a parliamentary rebellion in October by agreeing to a motion that parliament would have opportunities to debate Brexit on the condition that it would not undermine her negotiating strategy.

Holyrood’s approval would be required if the UK Parliament tried to change its powers in the way Brexit will, the Supreme Court has heard.

Why is it so important? The law state that the royal, in this case, the Prime Minister has Vito powers to pass laws without parliament voting.

Noting that there had already been several debates about Brexit in parliament, including one called by the opposition Labour Party, Eadie said lawmakers had not called for primary legislation to trigger Article 50 during those debates. But facing defeat on an opposition motion calling for it to disclose more details, the government agreed to publish “strategic plans” — though it’s not clear how detailed they will be.

“Secondly, the people who brought this case in the first place were perfectly entitled to do it”.

The Scottish and Welsh governments and the Attorney General for Northern Ireland are all intervening in the case.

“We have argued that the government can use the powers it has to enact what the public has decided”.

When will the result be known?

Not until after the New Year.

Lord Pannick told the court: “Parliament is sovereign”.

Downing Street voiced confidence in the government’s case, despite suggestions from some legal experts that it was destined to lose. The agreement will need to be approved by the Council and European Parliament as well as the United Kingdom approving the final agreement before it is put into action.

It’s said she is considering a simple 16-word Bill that will go forward without amendment and force a yes or no vote. “I will make as much information as possible available without prejudicing our negotiating position”, said David Davis, May’s Brexit minister. Scotland’s nationalist executive, which opposes Brexit, argued that the Scottish parliament should be consulted.

She said: “We have been completely clear that we are democrats and respect the outcome of the referendum, even though many of us – myself included – campaigned in the opposite direction”.

Most pro-EU British lawmakers have said they will not try to overturn the referendum result.