Some problems with the EU’s legal action. First, Art 4 WA requires the UK to ‘ensure compliance’ with a statement that the WA must have the ‘same legal effects’ (ie primacy/direct effect) in the UK as in the EU, including ‘through domestic legislation’. /n But the provisions to be granted this effect (in the NI Protocol) are not in force until 1.1.21. So they have no such effects until then. How can there be a breach of Art until then? 2/n

It had escaped my notice that in June the EU proposed a series of amendments to the Withdrawal Agreement. These are described as corrections and as dealing with situations unforeseen at the time the WA was signed (as per Art 164 WA). The proposed amendments are … 1/n To do with the UK’s financial contributions, and social security coordination. Others involve Annex 2, which sets out legislation that applies via Art 5(4) without exceptions to NI. Several regulations are proposed for inclusion, which had been omitted by mistake or are new …2/n

@pmdfoster Art 62 VCLT comes with conditions. First, the changed ‘circumstances’ cannot have been foreseen by the parties. So if the treaty provides for these, Art 62 does not apply. Second, it’s not about breach, but about bare facts. 1/n @pmdfoster So here we are talking about the emergence of unicorns (to use the vernacular) that are not presently foreseen, which ‘radically transforms the obligations’ of the treaty. But the treaty regulates the emergence of those unicorns. So how can Art 62 apply? 2/n