Short thread from last week on the legality of the PM’s ‘side letter’ with some quotes from Padfield itself. Basically, difficult to predict what courts would do
This is obviously an unprecedented situation, almost a law-school mock problem, but this kind of thing from Padfield, which is founded on the basic principle of parliamentary sovereignty, does make you wonder if a court may find PM’s shenanigans unlawful 
Ultimately, the question of whether the EU 27 accept the request (or treat the request as real rather than mixed messages) is a political one, but it may be useful for a court to consider this week and strike down the second letter as an illegitimate use of the PM's power
I don't really see how any lawyers can be 100% clear on this. There are strong opinions either way e.g. Lords Pannick thinks the PM "pursuing his policy objectives" by saying he doesn't agree with an extension is probably lawful hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-10-…
