UKC

The ECJ has ruled that the UK can unilaterally revoke Article 50 without needing the approval of all the other EC countries.

That should have a certain Mr. Yates spitting feathers...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/10/uk-can-unilaterally-stop-b...

In reply to Oceanrower:

The timing of this seems astoundingly fortuitous given tomorrows vote.  I'd excuse anyone for feeling they are the victims of a massive manipulation over the last two-years. 

In reply to Oceanrower:

Who'd have guessed an eu court would allow a net contributor back into the eu. Shocking news indeed, I bet no one predict that. 

In reply to Pan Ron:

I'm not sure why it should be seen as duplicitous for a legal body that's been asked to decide on a question to expedite their ruling when there are important decisions that rest on the ruling.

Whatever your view, surely it is in the public interest to have this argument with all the facts available and the ECJ has helped that happen.

In reply to Pan Ron:

Isn't the timing also potentially unhelpful?

If the government unilaterally withdraw article 50, then we can stay in the EU on our current terms with no approval from the rest of the EU.

But, if we want to extend article 50 beyond March, and hold a referendum before staying in the EU, then this would need approval from all other EU members, and we would potentially lose our rebate and our veto?

In reply to stevieb:

The judgement is that even if the Article 50 period is extended, we can cancel right up until the point that we leave.   The EU 27 would need to agree to extend the Article 50 period but we can cancel unilaterally.   

 

In reply to stevieb:

It doesn't seem to have actually clarified much in reality. If we extend A50 to hold a referendum we enter a new agreement anyway with rules to be decided though likely we would be allowed to remain without penalty if we committed to decide definitively in a timely manner.

If we withdraw notification to hold a referendum, vote to accept the deal and leave then there is no guarantee the same deal would be available upon re-submission given a dim view would likely be taken of such game playing and we would likely by then be dealing with a new commission and new or changing governments in Europe.

Still, I suppose it's one potential legal obstacle knocked down and a useful piece of political theatre, reminding MPs that they don't actually have to jump just because they've been lead to the cliff edge.

jk

In reply to summo:

It isn't a case of being allowed back in because we (the UK, not Sweden) haven't left yet. The court determined whether or not we can revoke our notification of leaving.

In reply to Pan Ron:

Certainly. The EU don't want us to leave and so will do what they can to help us remain. Obviously this clarification is extremely useful in quelling a lot of dissent to a peoples vote.

Why do you suddenly feel manipulated? Politicians talk to each other all the time and coordinate what they do, on both sides of the debate.

In reply to Pan Ron:

The manipulation was the UK government trying desperately to prevent the ECJ ruling on this so they could repeatedly claim the only alternatives were May's deal and hard Brexit.

Suddenly after the ruling the Tories that were saying Remaining wasn't an option because Article 50 was irrevocable are saying it is 'no surprise'.  Even Jacob Rees Mogg is saying it is how he read the treaty.

In reply to Pan Ron:

The Advocate General gave his opinion last week, so it isn't a surprise, and the timing of the answer is down to when the question was asked (by a group of Scottish MSPs and MEPs). 

In reply to Pan Ron:

I do indeed feel terribly manipulated, by Farage and the Tory self-seekers, by May and by Corbyn.

god forbid that legal action taken by the minority parties and regional devolved assemblies  should be permitted as well as Farage Rees Mogg Johnson and May.

In reply to stevieb:haven't you already lost the rebate?  Thought that went when you triggered Art 50 though I suppose that might apply to readmission rather than continuing the status quo.

Bit so much for business planning......

 

In reply to summo:

The EU was against this ruling too and argued that a country could not unilaterally revoke Article 50.

It is one of the few things that the EU and the UK have been in agreement over since Article 50 was triggered. It is likely that the EU will be more disappointed with the ruling than the UK government.