- Scottish court rejects judicial review on revocability of Article 50 notification (Andrew Wightman MSP and others (Petitioners))
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Is the question academic or hypothetical?
- Is there a breach of parliamentary privilege?
- Is it likely that the Court of Justice would accept a preliminary reference?
- Case details
Public Law analysis: On 8 June 2018, the Scottish Court of Session refused a petition for judicial review concerning whether the UK’s notification to withdraw from the EU under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) could be revoked unilaterally. Lord Boyd of Duncansby found that the question being asked was hypothetical and that the conditions for a preliminary reference had not been met. In Lord Boyd’s opinion, the petitioners were seeking judicial support for Parliament to consider the option of the UK remaining in the EU, which was a ‘clear and dangerous encroachment on the sovereignty of Parliament’.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial