‘When Sir Ivan Rogers stepped down in January as the UK’s top official in Brussels, he urged his colleagues to “continue to challenge ill-founded arguments and muddled thinking” and not to be afraid “to speak the truth to those in power.” The implication was clear. The government’s Brexit preparations displayed all these failings but the politicians responsible did not like having this pointed out.’
OUP Blog, 3rd February 2017
Source: www.blog.oup.com
‘The government’s Brexit strategy faces a fresh legal challenge in the high court on Friday when campaigners argue that parliament must separately legislate to remove the UK from the European Economic Area (EEA) and the single market.’
The Guardian, 3rd February 2017
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Jacqueline Renton, barrister of 4 Paper Buildings, reviews the latest key decisions in international children law.’
Family Law Week, 1st February 2017
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Britain’s £26bn legal industry is under threat from post-Brexit restrictions to freedom of movement and exit from the single market, the country’s top lawyers have warned. MPs on the Justice Select Committee, who are gathering evidence on the impact of leaving the EU, were told that there would be little left to “salvage” of the successful industry if lawyers were stripped of free movement and lost the right to practise in the EU because of differing regulations.’
The Independent, 1st February 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The government’s Brexit strategy will come under scrutiny when an official policy document setting out its plans is published later.’
BBC News, 2nd February 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court judgment in Gina Miller is not merely an affirmation of what the High Court said. The eight member majority confirmed the earlier decision, but also took the opportunity to restate a fundamental principle, which had been left implicit by the court below. The High Court said that the substantive rights arising out of EU law and the European Communities Act 1972, in employment, environment, consumer protection, competition or free movement, could not be abolished merely by the exercise of the royal prerogative. This was a standard interpretation of existing law, adapted for the context of Article 50. The Supreme Court accepted that this was correct, but added one additional reason.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 30th January 2017
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Following one of the most constitutionally significant legal challenges in a generation, the Supreme Court today handed down its judgment in the Article 50 Brexit appeal. By a majority of eight to three, the Justices held that the UK could not trigger Article 50 without an Act of Parliament. The Court also ruled that the UK Government was not compelled to consult the devolved institutions or obtain their approval to withdraw.’
Blackstone Chambers, 24th January 2017
Source: www.blackstonechambers.com
‘Politics and the law were kept well apart in the Supreme Court’s adroit and erudite judgment in Miller.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 26th January 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Explaining some of the key buzzwords being used in the debate about the UK leaving the EU, with Daily Politics reporter Adam Fleming who knows a single market from a customs union.’
BBC News, 26th January 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In the new age of alternative facts, even Sean Spicer might struggle to spin Tuesday’s Supreme Court judgment as anything other than a comprehensive defeat for the government.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 26th January 2017
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Changes to the official ministerial code that removed a requirement that ministers must comply with international laws and treaties are to be challenged in the court of appeal.’
The Guardian, 26th January 2017
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Information commissioner raises concern and campaigners threaten legal action over security firm’s use of body-worn cameras.’
The Guardian, 24th January 2017
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘An overriding principle of British law is that parliament is sovereign – and we should be grateful to the judges, in the face of huge pressure, for upholding it.’
The Guardian, 24th January 2017
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The Competition Bulletin is pleased to welcome the first in a three-part series of blogs on Brexit and merger control by Ben Forbes and Mat Hughes of AlixPartners.’
Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 23rd January 2017
Source: www.competitionbulletin.com
‘After the Government lost its historic legal battle over Brexit, the Supreme Court published the full 43,000-word judgment online.’
Daily Telegraph, 24th January 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has ruled against Theresa May’s Brexit plans and decreed that MPs are entitled to vote on whether to trigger Article 50.’
The Independent, 24th January 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court in London will give its ruling on Article 50 on Tuesday, following a four-day hearing last December.’
Daily Telegraph, 23rd January 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The supreme court is due to deliver its eagerly awaited Brexit judgment declaring whether ministers or parliament have legal authority to approve the UK’s departure from the European Union.’
The Guardian, 24th January 2017
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Four different versions of the law giving Theresa May the power to start Brexit have already been prepared as ministers brace themselves for Supreme Court defeat this week.’
Daily Telegraph, 21st January 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Unlike many legal subjects, constitutional law involves an awareness of history. Conversely, a student of British Constitutional History benefits from an understanding of legal concepts. (Though, as a history undergraduate who in 1969 was taught the subject by Jenifer Hart, the wife of HLA Hart, any mention of the “rule of recognition” would have been lost on me.) As we await the decision of the Supreme Court, it is germane to consider the story of the UK’s accession to the EEC and other Communities in 1971-1973. The debates in the House of Commons in 1971-72 provide one with a good understanding of the legal and constitutional issue which were at play; as well, of course of the international, political and economic issues which engaged the attention of Ministers and backbenchers.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 19th January 2017
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
© Inner Temple Library 2024