You are using an older browser version. Please use a supported version for the best MSN experience.

Brexit news latest: European Court hearing to consider whether Article 50 can be reversed gets go ahead

Evening Standard logo Evening Standard 20/11/2018 Hatty Collier
Theresa May wearing a blue dress © Provided by Local News RSS EN-GB

The Government has failed to stop a European Court hearing which will consider whether the UK can unilaterally revoke its Article 50 request to leave the EU.

The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal by the Government against a Scottish ruling which asked the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) to look at whether the UK can reverse the Brexit clause.

A cross-party group of MPs, MEPs and MSPs, along with Jolyon Maugham QC, the director of the Good Law Project, had asked the Scottish courts to rule that the case should be referred to the CJEU in Luxembourg.

The case will now be heard at the CJEU on November 27.

Lawyers for the Department for Exiting the European Union (DExEU) had initiated today's appeal in the Supreme Court.

Related: Tories warned toppling the PM would lead to 'appalling chaos'

a man holding a sign: brexit1911.jpg © Provided by Local News RSS EN-GB brexit1911.jpg

Anti-Brexit demonstrators protest outside the Houses of Parliament on Monday, as the government was forced to pledge publication of a Brexit versus no Brexit comparative economic analysis 

The Court of Session in Edinburgh had ruled in September to refer the question of whether Article 50 could be revoked to the CJEU after a case brought by the cross-party group of politicians.

Related: DUP fire 'warning shot' to May

The CJEU applied its expedited procedure, as requested by the Court of Session, to the case and an oral hearing was fixed for November 27.

The UK Government made an application for permission to appeal against the ruling to the Supreme Court, which was refused by Lord Carloway, Scotland's most senior judge and Lord President of the Court of Session in Edinburgh, earlier this month.

Theresa May standing on a stage: theresamay1911a.jpg © Provided by Independent Digital News & Media Limited theresamay1911a.jpg

Another blow for Theresa May: The Government has lost an appeal to stop a European Court hearing which will consider whether the UK can unilaterally revoke its Article 50 request to leave the EU 

The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union then applied directly to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal.

But, refusing permission on Tuesday, the court said the Court of Session's ruling was "preliminary" and it would still have to reach a judgment on the matter after the European Court has given guidance.

Related: Spain threatens to reject May's Brexit deal over Gibraltar

A statement issued by the Supreme Court said: "It is clear that this interlocutor did not constitute a final judgment."

It continued: "As both this court and the CJEU have made clear, the preliminary ruling is merely a step in the proceedings pending before the national court - it is that court which must assume responsibility for the subsequent judicial decision.

"It will therefore remain for the Court of Session to give judgment in the light of the preliminary ruling, any relevant facts which it may find and any relevant rules of domestic law. It is only then that there will be a final judgment in the proceedings."

The initial case had been brought by a cross-party group of politicians: Labour MEPs Catherine Stihler and David Martin, Joanna Cherry MP and Alyn Smith MSP of the SNP, and Green MSPs Andy Wightman and Ross Greer, together with lawyer Mr Maugham QC, director of the Good Law Project.

The decision from Lord Carloway in September overturned an earlier ruling when it was said the question being asked was "hypothetical" and the conditions for a reference had not been met.

But Lord Carloway said it was "clear" MPs at Westminster would be required to vote on any Brexit deal agreed by the EU and the UK Government.

In his September judgment, Lord Carloway was clear the CJEU would not be advising Parliament on "what it must or ought to do".

Instead, he said it would be "merely declaring the law as part of its central function", adding that "how Parliament chooses to react to that declarator is entirely a matter for that institution".

AdChoices
AdChoices

More from Evening Standard

image beaconimage beaconimage beacon