,
7 tweets,
7 min read
Read on Twitter
@StevePeers @REMAIN_campaign @JolyonMaugham @Brigid_Fowler Not sure. The ECJ in Wightman said that a MS cannot be expelled in the course of the Art 50 process. It's clear Parliament, which is constitutionally sovereign, doesn't want to exit (yet), and there is not an Act saying this. 1/
@StevePeers @REMAIN_campaign @JolyonMaugham @Brigid_Fowler This doesn't mean the UK can play for time indefinitely. But a reasonable decision, taken "in accordance with its (the UK's) constitutional requirements", ought to be respected by the Eur Council. Particularly as revoke is still in play. 2/
@StevePeers @REMAIN_campaign @JolyonMaugham @Brigid_Fowler The Eur Council is under a duty of loyal cooperation with the UK throughout its membership. That is a further reason for accepting an extension. 3/
@StevePeers @REMAIN_campaign @JolyonMaugham @Brigid_Fowler That does not mean that the Eur Council's powers under 50(3) are eviscerated. It can still decide on the length of the extension, and on any conditions. 4/
@StevePeers @REMAIN_campaign @JolyonMaugham @Brigid_Fowler The Eur Council can set conditions which ensure an orderly withdrawal. It can also rely on the duty of loyal cooperation. In the past, the ECJ has given effect to codes of conduct, in the context of EU international action, on the basis of that duty (eg FAO case). 5/
@StevePeers @REMAIN_campaign @JolyonMaugham @Brigid_Fowler And it would be "interesting" to see what would happen if the Eur Council said "no deal on 12 April" and the UK simply did not accept that. What would the EU do, and what would be the state of the law? END/ (In tweet 1 read "NOW an act saying this".
