Transcripts (perhaps draft) of the Article 50 ‘Brexit’ Appeal hearings at the Supreme Court

My Lords, my Lady, probably the only authorities volume that I will be taking the court to is the Northern Ireland authorities volume 1, if that is of assistance.

My Lords, my Lady, the applicants in the Agnew case, as you will have seen, are a cross party and a cross community grouping of politicians, individuals and human rights organisations who are concerned about how withdrawal from the EU will uniquely affect Northern Ireland -- and further concerned, as the lead claimant is in the other case, to ensure that the process of dealing with the referendum result is both lawful and properly considered.

As the court will have seen, there were four issues dealt with by Mr Justice Maguire in the court below, which its common case are broadly reflected in the questions referred for this court. In the time available, I intend to focus my hopefully economical submissions on issues one and two, and within those contexts to avoid duplication of the submissions already made or to be made by parties or interveners in the Miller appeal.

If time permits I want to say something very briefly about issue three and to make three short points in response to the Government's case on issue four.

My Lords, my Lady, issue one is whether an act of Parliament is required before notice can validly be given to the European Council under Article 50 TEU in light of the provisions of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. In summary we say that the Northern Ireland Act, like the European Communities Act, is not neutral as to whether the UK is a member of the EU, or whether the treaties continue to apply in Northern Ireland. There are three strands to the argument we advance on that issue.

My learned friend the Advocate General was right to identify paragraph 80 of our printed case as containing a summary of those strands, and that is to be found at MS 23716.

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech