UK High Court upholds Brexit challenge, rules MP should have say on terms

On Thursday a panel of three judges ruled the UK Secretary of State “does not have power under the crown’s prerogative to give notice pursuant to Article 50 ... for the United Kingdom to withdraw from the European Union.”

It’s a huge blow for the government, which had planned to trigger Article 50 beforethe end of March next year — setting in process the two-year negotiation for the UK to leave the European Union.

The government will appeal the decision and it’s expected to be resolved by the Supreme Court by December in a fast-tracked judgment.

Prime Minister Theresa May’s office said she was “disappointed” with the decision.

“The country voted to leave the European Union in a referendum approved by act of parliament. And the government is determined to respect the result of the referendum,” it said. “Our plans remain to invoke Article 50 by the end of March.”

A ‘ROYAL PEROGATIVE’?

The ruling was dubbed the most constitutionally significant in a generation and has been led by former model-turned-finance entrepreneur Gina Miller and hairdresser Deir Tozetti dos Santos as the second claimant.

Ms Miller said she has received death threats over the case and has previously said she felt “physically sick” because people had been “tricked and fooled” by the referendum debate that was characterised by scaremongering and misinformation.

Other interested parties involved in the case include “The People’s Challenge”, featuring an Englishman of Bangladeshi origin, an Irishman, two Scotsmen resident in France, a Welshman and a Gibraltarian, whose wife is Spanish; another group of British expatriates; and British children of EU nationals and non-EU carers of British children or the disabled.

Ecstatic - our case against the Government prevailed. Only Parliament can involve Article 50!

— Fergal McFerran (@FergalMcFerran) November 3, 2016

They claimed the government needed parliamentary approval for such a momentous decision — particularly when key issues like whether or not Britain will remain in the single market remain unresolved. The group is now raising funds for a Supreme Court appeal.

The government argues the referendum result delivered them a “royal prerogative” which acts like an executive order to allow them to move ahead with the decision.

British expat Robert Pigney, who was also among the claimants, said the ruling was an “immense victory” for British people.

“The fact that this may block or slow down Brexit is purely coincidental. Our primary focus is that parliamentary democracy be maintained and upheld.”

UKIP leader Nigel Farage said he feared the decision would lead to a “betrayal” of the British public.

“I now fear that every attempt will be made to block or delay the triggering of Article 50. If this is so, they have no idea of the level of public anger they will provoke.” 

Leave Means Leave co-chairman Richard Tice said the decision was “disgraceful” and “17.4 million people will be furious today.”

“Our democracy is being damaged by an elite band of people in the legal system.”

“A vote in Parliament is wholly unnecessary, time-consuming and betrays the democratic will of the people.”

The pound rose on Thursday following the news, as markets speculate that the more parliament is involved the less likely it will mean a “hard” Brexit takes place.

“Hard” Brexit is used to refer to a UK outside the single market with complete border control, while “soft” Brexit is used to refer to staying inside the European single market and accepting freedom of movement.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said there must be “transparency and accountability” when it comes to the terms of Brexit.

Sterling topped $U1.24 for the first time in three weeks, climbing more than 1 per cent against the dollar, which has been knocked by uncertainty about what a Donald Trump presidency might mean for economic policy, free trade and geopolitics.