The Law of Nations
  • Home
  • About
  • Public International Law
  • Private International Law
  • Arbitration
  • Podcasts
  • Contact Us
Brexit 0

Can notification given under Article 50 be revoked?

Jessica Simor QC has written to Prime Minister Theresa May with a legal opinion confirming that Article of the TFEU may be revoked without agreement of the other 27 EU States. She explains why.

By Jessica Simor QC · On January 15, 2018


On 6 October 2017 I wrote to the Prime Minister seeking a copy of the legal advice provided to her, which I understand confirms that a notification made under Article 50 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU may be revoked without the agreement of the other twenty seven members of the EU if the United Kingdom decides that it no longer intends to leave the European Union. Such revocation would have to take place before 29 March 2019 (or during an extension of time granted by all 27 other EU States), that is, whilst the UK is still a full member of the EU, and would enable the UK to retain all of its current privileges.

There has been some debate about whether, if the question of EU membership was referred back to the people, and the people decided that the UK should remain in the EU, Article 50 would allow for such revocation. Further, in the context of the debate on the Withdrawal Bill and the need for Parliament to have a meaningful vote on ‘the deal’, questions were raised as to what would happen if Parliament rejected the deal, including whether Her Majesty’s Government could seek more time to negotiate a better deal or in order to provide the people with a chance to re-consider the matter in the light of the deal secured.

Only with a proper understanding of where we are legally can the UK Government act democratically.

For obvious reasons this is extremely important. Crucially, if the UK Government is unable to secure a good deal or no deal is secured, the United Kingdom retains, at least up until 29 March 2019, the option to remain within the EU. It is essential not only that the UK Government understands this but that Parliament and the people understand this too. Only with a proper understanding of where we are legally can the UK Government act democratically.

My Member of Parliament, Tulip Siddiq, raised the disclosure of this advice in Prime Minister’s Questions and followed up with a letter to the Prime Minister, also seeking access. This was declined on 5 December 2017.  On that basis, and at the request of many individuals who understand that this issue is extremely important and wish to understand the legal position, I prepared a legal Opinion with two other specialist EU law QCs – Marie Demetriou QC and Tim Ward QC.

I provided a copy of this Opinion to the Prime Minister on 11 January 2011.  It can be found on on the web-site of UK Legal Future here.  This is a non-party affiliated group of lawyers working to assist Members of Parliament in understanding the legal implications of the UK leaving the EU.

Jessica Simor QC

Jessica Simor QC

Jessica is recognised as one of the country’s leading specialists in public/regulatory, EU and human rights law, acting for a wide range of clients, ranging from large companies, regulators, Government departments, NGOs, and for private individuals. She has particular experience in data protection privacy/data protection, tax, regulatory/competition law across different industries and in civil liberties work. Jessica represented the second Claimant, Dos Santos, in R (Miller & Anor) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union & Ors [2017] UKSC 5, the challenge to the Prime Minister’s decision to use the Royal Prerogative to notify the EU of the UK’s intended withdrawal under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. Jessica also recently acted for Privacy International and Open Rights Group in its intervention in a challenge to the emergency legislation adopted to require telecom companies to retain data showing the identity, time, location and duration of electronic communications in R (Watson and Davis) and the Open Rights Group and Privacy International v S/S Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1185; [2015] EWHC 2092.




You Might Also Like

  • Brexit

    Brexit – understanding the EU’s negotiating position on trade

  • Brexit

    The impact of Brexit on the UK’s extradition arrangements – The Final Countdown?

  • Brexit

    UK-EU security cooperation post Brexit: are we running out of time?

No Comments

Leave a reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mailing List

Sign up to our Mailing List

Categories

  • Arbitration
  • Book Review
  • Brexit
  • Business and Human Rights
  • Comparative Law
  • Constitutional Law
  • Criminal Law
  • Environmental Law
  • From the editors
  • Human Rights
  • International Trade
  • News Round-up
  • Podcasts
  • Private International Law
  • Public International Law
  • Uncategorized

Archives

  • November 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016

From Twitter

  • New post: why depriving Shamima Begum of her UK citizenship violates international law. https://t.co/I51X5qT8um… https://t.co/FF0p3hqE8Q

© Matrix Chambers. All rights reserved. | Accessibility | Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy