Rejoin EU Now Profile picture
Jun 7, 2018 11 tweets 5 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
Important Thread.

Until now we’ve underestimated the importance of this case (Shindler) which is being brought before the EU General Court (GC). It seeks to declare the Brexit process illegal because people were inappropriately disenfranchised. 1/…
Because (as is usual for Theresa May’s administration) the Government has been saying different things in London & Brussels, the case will look very different to the General Court in Luxembourg than it does to us in the UK 2/.
In the UK we know that the Referendum was not the decision, just a consultation that Parliament decided we had to go through first. It didn’t matter too much to the Courts who voted in the referendum because it only had political, not legal, effect.3/
When Shindler brought his case in the UK, the Court ruled against him, because the referendum vote was not determinative. The Court refused to refer questions about whether EU Law applied to the referendum franchise to the CJEU, declaring that Article 50.1 did not apply. 4/
However, the Govt has told the EU institutions in its A50 notice that the referendum result, as confirmed by EUNoWA, was the actual decision, not just a consultative exercise that Parliament decided had to be gone through before the decision was made. 5/
So Shindler’s case is proceeding before the General Court on the basis that, contrary to what the Govt is saying in the #A50Challenge case, the referendum result is the decision. 6/
Effectively the Shindler case now before the EU Court is a rerun of his UK case, except this time on the basis that the referendum is decisive. EU law, including the principle of equality, will be relevant & an EU Court gets to decide whether A50(1) has legal effect. 7/
The Govt has not intervened in the EU Schindler case, because that would make matters worse. It cannot win a case in the UK on the basis of one set of legal arguments & expect to win a case in Luxembourg by making completely contradictory claims. 8/
If the EU General Court learns in the Shindler hearing that the Govt is claiming in the UK Courts that the UK hasn’t made a constitutionally valid decision to leave the EU & doesn’t need to, then if the UK Court doesn’t pull the plug on Brexit, the EU Court might well do it. 9/
So, you see, the Shindler case is dynamite 💥🌪☄️ 10/
Support #A50Challenge. Stop this Brexit process before we suffer the national disgrace of a European Court stopping it for us.


• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Rejoin EU Now

Rejoin EU Now Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @rejoineunow

Jul 11, 2018

You may recall that, back in May of last year, one of our friends asked DExEU for a copy of the UK’s decision to leave the EU:

You may also recall that on 12 June, the Divisional Court found that the UK’s decision to leave the EU was taken by the PM herself when she signed the A50 notification letter on 29 March 2017

Which of course is NOT what DExEU told our friend back in May (two months after the decision)

Read 7 tweets
May 9, 2018
There are 2 theories as to how Brexit may be stopped. The first (Revocation) is that a conclusive decision to leave the EU is not required to commence the Article 50 process & that the UK can unilaterally change its mind. 1/…
The second, #A50Challenge, is that an express, legally effective decision is required to legally start the process, which has not yet been made.

The first theory, Revocation, depends on two untested assertions about EU law which can only be decided by the European Court. 2/
#A50Challenge relies on existing UK law which was the basis for the decision in Miller. The solution lies in the hands of UK Courts under UK law.

It is not Parliament that has failed us, but Govt, which didn’t ask Parl for the decision needed for A50 to be lawfully invoked. 3/
Read 4 tweets
Apr 25, 2018
Good question. #A50Scotland is not separate to the case to which you refer. It is an application to intervene in it. The existing case assumes that a decision to leave the EU has been properly taken & the A50 notice is valid. We dispute that, which is why we are intervening. 1/
We’re seeking permission to ask the Court, when considering whether it’s possible to withdraw the A50 notice under EU law, to first consider whether it is possible to do so under UK law as it stands. If it is, that raises the question of whether the notice is actually valid. 2/
A better question would be to ask why SNP Labour Green & LibDem politicians, supported by money donated via Crowd Justice, are trying to prevent us asking the Court to engage with a rudimentary part of their own question: Can the A50 notice be withdrawn under current UK law? 3/
Read 4 tweets
Jan 29, 2018

Better than our word, here is the update we promised for tomorrow!



(Its long so it’ll be a thread of pictures, but you can also read on our funder). Here goes:
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!