Thread by @SimonFRCox

“Can UK be forced to leave EU against its will?”

“Of course not!” says CJEU.

Some thoughts from this EU lawyer on today’s judgment. curia.europa.eu/juris/document… Thread 1/20

The case was decided by a full court - all 28 judges of CJEU (there’s one from each country). That’s rare, it happens once every few years. 2/

The judgment is unanimous, because CJEU judgments are *always* unanimous. Every single one. 3/

Just because CJEU judgment is unanimous doesn’t mean all the judges agreed. They vote and the majority view is adopted by whole court. But they also negotiate over what to include so each judge is as content as possible. 4/

There’s no appeal from a CJEU judgment. (It’s different for the CJEU’s General Court, which is one level down.) 5/

CJEU judgment is an answer to Scottish courts request for a ruling on EU law. This is under an EU Treaty procedure for this set up in 1957. 6/

UK Gov said CJEU shouldn’t decide issue - it was “inadmissible”. CJEU rejection of this is completely normal - it defers to national court and asks “is it obvious that the court doesn’t need an answer?” Paras 26-34. 7/

When reading the main reasoning, bear in mind that CJEU weighs its words very carefully. And uses them to lay down its approach for the future of EU law. 8/

Court starts main reasoning with 2 crucial statements.
- EU membership means a voluntary limitation of sovereignty.
- EU is a new legal order of which citizens (as well as states) are the subjects. 9/

Court then - very conventionally - says it will answer Q having regard to Treaties as a whole, and their purposes. Para 47. 10/

CJEU then starts with words of A50 - the notice is of an “intention” to leave. And intentions aren’t unchangeable. Para 49. 11/

CJEU points out that A50 notice is entirely choice of Member State. It’s a sovereign act. Para 50. 12/

Court concludes A50 has two purposes: enshrining sovereign right to withdraw & establishing orderly procedure for withdrawal. Para 56. 13/

Central CJEU reasoning: UK’s unilateral right to withdraw A50 notice is because of sovereign nature of UK’s right to decide whether to leave EU. Paras 57-60. 14/

CJEU then contrasts

- sovereign right of UK to exit Brexit

with

- EU controlled possibility of an extension of process for exiting EU.
Para 60. 15/

CJEU takes time to point out that exit affects *citizens* (not just states). As above, they are also *the subjects* of EU law - they have rights.

So states cannot be forced to exit against their will. Para 64. 16/

Just as states can’t be forced to join EU - they can’t be forced to leave. (V significant statement for Poland & Hungary). Para 65. 17/

CJEU concludes that a state which has given A50 notice has an absolute right to revoke it, as long as the2 year period (or extension) has not expired. Para 69. 18/

The only condition is that the revocation of the A50 notice is in writing and unconditional. (No messing around by the Member State...) 19/

Judgment is crystal clear & well-reasoned. It’s grounded in sovereign power of states to remain EU members, and in mutual respect between EU and states. If trusts states not to use A50 as a tool.

Judgment clears way for UK to do what it thinks best. 20/20