The ECJ has provided a definitive ruling this morning that the UK can unilaterally withdraw Article 50 (HERE). The British government has spent a lot of taxpayer's money trying to avoid the ECJ making such a determination but now we have it. The Spectator has the full judgement (HERE) but the important part is paragraph 69 which says:
"It follows from the foregoing that the notification by a Member State
of its intention to withdraw does not lead inevitably to the withdrawal
of that Member State from the European Union. On the contrary, a Member
State that has reversed its decision to withdraw from the European
Union is entitled to revoke that notification for as long as a
withdrawal agreement concluded between that Member State and the
European Union has not entered into force or, if no such agreement has
been concluded, for as long as the two-year period laid down in Article
50(3) TEU, possibly extended in accordance with that provision, has not
expired.
And the final ruling is below which makes clear we can do this and retain the same benefits and conditions that we had before:
On those grounds, the Court (Full Court) hereby rules:
On those grounds, the Court (Full Court) hereby rules:
Article 50 TEU must be interpreted as meaning that, where a Member
State has notified the European Council, in accordance with that
article, of its intention to withdraw from the European Union, that
article allows that Member State — for as long as a withdrawal agreement
concluded between that Member State and the European Union has not
entered into force or, if no such agreement has been concluded, for as
long as the two-year period laid down in Article 50(3) TEU, possibly
extended in accordance with that paragraph, has not expired — to revoke
that notification unilaterally, in an unequivocal and unconditional
manner, by a notice addressed to the European Council in writing, after
the Member State concerned has taken the revocation decision in
accordance with its constitutional requirements. The purpose of that
revocation is to confirm the EU membership of the Member State concerned
under terms that are unchanged as regards its status as a Member State,
and that revocation brings the withdrawal procedure to an end.
From Buzzfeed:
Jo Maugham QC, director of The Good Law project – the legal team which
worked with MSPs to bring the case – welcomed the judgement.
"No one voted for a deal that cuts our freedoms and leaves us worse off with less control," Maugham said in a statement.
"But all the courts can do is open the door to remaining," he continued. "It is up to MPs to remember what they came into politics for. And find the moral courage to put the country's interest before private ambition."
"No one voted for a deal that cuts our freedoms and leaves us worse off with less control," Maugham said in a statement.
"But all the courts can do is open the door to remaining," he continued. "It is up to MPs to remember what they came into politics for. And find the moral courage to put the country's interest before private ambition."
