,
11 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
Thread: 1. The next Court of Session action against the PM is one challenging his declared refusal to abide by the law and sign a letter to EU seeking an A50 extension under the European Union (Withdrawal) (No 2) Act 2019; failing miracles, he's bound to do this by 19 October
2. You can read the background here goodlawproject.org/rule-law-not-t… and the petition is available here dropbox.com/s/ml1e5etv6utt…
3. This goes straight to the Inner House as a petition to the nobile officium (a rare procedure, though I did an unrelated one last week) under Rule of Court 14.3, here scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-s…
4. On 13 Sept, the Court ordered the PM to lodge answers, which would say either (a) he wasn't refusing to obey the law or (b) why he shouldn't be ordered to obey it, by Friday last week. He did so, but he's not made them public as he should; #cherrycase scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-s… 
5. So the press should be asking to see his answers and Note of Argument, and making them public. A hearing will soon be fixed by the Court, though that's unlikely to be before October 19. In this type of case, Court of Session procedure is very flexible.
6. Nobile officium petitions are typically brought when there's no other legal remedy. This isn't Scots Civil Procedure 101, but if you want to read more go here journalonline.co.uk/Magazine/60-12… or here academia.edu/18791315/The_N…
7. Now, critically, one of its uses is when someone can't/won't sign a legal deed they're bound to; the Court authorises signature by the Clerk of Court, and that's legally valid. Here's one example, Boag 1967 SC 322. It's not terribly difficult legally.
8. It's actually not a bad solution for the PM in some ways. It avoids or mitigates any contempt of court finding, and it lets him tell his supporters he kept his promise not to sign. But it maximises uncertainty for everyone, his fanboys will falsely claim it's not valid; and
9. if he runs this into a situation where the Court is doing this, there'll be claims that this is further evidence that judges applying law are biased and there'll be more attacks on the Courts doing their job. Is this what he wants? Perhaps. He's an anarchist, isn't he?
10. Now, I know some of you like to get the Latin right. Just pronounce it as "nobbelay offisioom' and nobody'll contradict you. The English call it "the inherent jurisdiction" and that's OK too.
11. Finally, all credit to @JolyonMaugham and @GoodLawProject, who choose to litigate claims in Scotland rather than England when Scotland's the better country to go to court, as it is here yet again. Cheers!
