Brexit legal challenge.

skankdelvar

Heartfeltdawn said:

Absolutely left hand/right hand at the minute. The Times versus the Sunday Times is experiencing much of the same dilemma at the minute given the Times went for Remain and the ST is firmly behind Gove. 

Yes it is a private matter as the Zoopla statement says. But somehow I don't think we've heard the end of it. 

Might I suggest that the Mail has piled into Mishcon because of their links to Hacked Off? 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2379632/Hugh-Grant-blonde-lawyer-Hacked-Off-s-cosy-links-ruthless-law-firm-investigators-illegally-invaded-people-s-privacy.html

Getting Pendlebury in to write that indicates a level of dislike toward Mishcon. RP is well known for hacking opponents to bits into articles. His article list online makes for gory reading. 

My heartfelt thanks for that link. So Mischcon's have employed sundry notorious phone hackers in their time, eh? Interesting.

Nothing made me chortle so much as the description of the antics of Mr Tom Watson MP (Lab) at the ritzy, top-flight wedding of Mishcon senior partner Charlotte Harris to 'investment banker' Jamie Burr:

'At the reception, and we know this because he wrote about it in a diary column for the New Statesman, Watson ‘entertained’ the gathering of celebrities, MPs, bankers and highly remunerated senior Mishcon staff with a karaoke rendition of the new wave anthem Teenage Kicks'.

Poor Watson; he probably thought the assembled toffs and city wide-boys were laughing with him. He should be careful about the company he keeps; the Jezbollahs will be calling him 'Blairite vermin' next.

Evilmags

Wow, the same people arguing to null and void a referendum, the most proportional of all elections, then argue for proportional representation. Left wing hypocrisy is seriously such a contradiction in logic that it never fails to leave me stunned. If you cant see the (blindingly obvious) contradictions between both positions, please, just stop voting....

digitalscream

Evilmags said:

Wow, the same people arguing to null and void a referendum, the most proportional of all elections, then argue for proportional representation. Left wing hypocrisy is seriously such a contradiction in logic that it never fails to leave me stunned. If you cant see the (blindingly obvious) contradictions between both positions, please, just stop voting....

Who's arguing to void the referendum?

ToneControl

p90fool said:

Evilmags said:

Christ sake, the UK just ditched the biggest set of off balance sheet liabilities ever run up in history and people are upset. Legally trying to challenge the result of a referendum which had the highest rate of participation in decades is pathetic. If you have any belief in democracy what so ever, you have to now support the UK leaving. It really is that simple, and trying to paint half the population as "thick" "racist" and every other insult that has been hurled at the out campaign, after the vote has happened, is the behavior of totalitarians. The consequences of such behavior, and the degree of extremism and other forms of behavior it would unleash would be unprecedented. 

Leavers should be applauding the attempt to legally cross the "t"s and dot the "i"s. It'll stop the result being undermined or challenged at a later date.

I'm fairly certain that enough MPs who wanted to remain will change their minds when it comes to it - to do otherwise would be suicidal politically.

Remainers (like me) pinning their hopes on MPs sticking to their principles and blocking the invocation of Article 50 in parliament is naive IMO. 

it's clear to me that there is a large group of protestors who are hoping that Brexit will be blocked.

Like @evilmags say, the biggest worry I had was the spectacular liabilities the EU has accumulated

There is no way anyone of working age in the UK will ever get pensions like those in Greece, yet the Eurozone will be paying for them,

and if we remained in the EU, we would end up in the Eurozone, contributing

These are real bailouts, not like the UK banking ones

As you say, MPs need to embrace the vote result or find another job

skankdelvar

It's clear to me that - for some people and not necessarily here - 'scrutinising the constitutional legality of unilaterally invoking Article 50' is code for 'I hope ever so much that the mainly Europhile House of Commons finds a way to vote this disgusting result down'.

Let me dispel some confusion about my position: I am an unrepentant laisser-faire capitalist and long-term exploiter of the masses. As such I am entirely relaxed about The Great Challenge because it's in the natural order of things.

When the 'little people' get upset about something they go on the internet and complain; they achieve precisely nothing. The rich simply call their lawyers and buy what they need in the way of justice. It's no surprise; always was and forever more shall be.

Anyway, the tactic's worked for me on so many occasions that it would be hypocritical of me to complain.

Evilmags

ToneControl said:

p90fool said:

Evilmags said:

Christ sake, the UK just ditched the biggest set of off balance sheet liabilities ever run up in history and people are upset. Legally trying to challenge the result of a referendum which had the highest rate of participation in decades is pathetic. If you have any belief in democracy what so ever, you have to now support the UK leaving. It really is that simple, and trying to paint half the population as "thick" "racist" and every other insult that has been hurled at the out campaign, after the vote has happened, is the behavior of totalitarians. The consequences of such behavior, and the degree of extremism and other forms of behavior it would unleash would be unprecedented. 

Leavers should be applauding the attempt to legally cross the "t"s and dot the "i"s. It'll stop the result being undermined or challenged at a later date.

I'm fairly certain that enough MPs who wanted to remain will change their minds when it comes to it - to do otherwise would be suicidal politically.

Remainers (like me) pinning their hopes on MPs sticking to their principles and blocking the invocation of Article 50 in parliament is naive IMO. 

it's clear to me that there is a large group of protestors who are hoping that Brexit will be blocked.

Like @evilmags say, the biggest worry I had was the spectacular liabilities the EU has accumulated

There is no way anyone of working age in the UK will ever get pensions like those in Greece, yet the Eurozone will be paying for them,

and if we remained in the EU, we would end up in the Eurozone, contributing

These are real bailouts, not like the UK banking ones

As you say, MPs need to embrace the vote result or find another job

This by a mile, and it was actually a (top London hedge fund) Greek economist with 35 years market experience who made this point most forcefully to me. People forget that their are many countries who would love a free trade agreement with the world´s fifth largest economy. I remember the same doom mongers in 1992 when the UK left the exchange mechanism, so I know what happens next if we leave. And it´s a lot better than staying. 

I wonder how may remainers have actually lived and worked in Europe? If they had they´d have a much more positive view of leaving the EU. Europe is nice to live in. It is awful to try and earn money and get promoted in. 

Clarky

I reckon that voting Brexit down may well be more dangerous than going ahead with it because it sends out very bad signals to us lil' folk

fretmeister

Evilmags;1138362" said:

Wow, the same people arguing to null and void a referendum, the most proportional of all elections, then argue for proportional representation. Left wing hypocrisy is seriously such a contradiction in logic that it never fails to leave me stunned. If you cant see the (blindingly obvious) contradictions between both positions, please, just stop voting....

Why don't you actually read what was said?

No one in this thread has advocated for nullifying the referendum at all.

This has been pointed out several times and yet you continue to bleat this untruth.

Perhaps you could put it on the side of a bus?

ToneControl

Evilmags said:

This by a mile, and it was actually a (top London hedge fund) Greek economist with 35 years market experience who made this point most forcefully to me. People forget that their are many countries who would love a free trade agreement with the world´s fifth largest economy. I remember the same doom mongers in 1992 when the UK left the exchange mechanism, so I know what happens next if we leave. And it´s a lot better than staying. 

I wonder how may remainers have actually lived and worked in Europe? If they had they´d have a much more positive view of leaving the EU. Europe is nice to live in. It is awful to try and earn money and get promoted in. 

Also:

from the stats I've seen, there are about 1.2m Brits living in the EU

of those nearly 1m are pensioners living in Spain, bankrolled by the UK

I've heard ones in Lanzarote saying "when I was ill, they flew me to Las Palmas, and put my Mrs up in a hotel". Duh, the Dept of Health gets a monthly invoice for all this

This leaves about 250k Brits working in the EU

latest estimates I saw are that 300k French people live in London

So that's more French just in London than all the working Brits in the EU

Brits are dreaming if they think the EU is an open door to working abroad. Almost zero Brits have language skills that could equip them, and only very specialist skills like for example IT, engineering or Banking could ever get you a job in the EU

Whereas the other way, many many Professional Europeans have good enough English to work here very easily. The Dutch and Scandis would pass almost unnoticed 

I'm saying it's a one way street. Almost no-one ever from the Uk will succeed in a career in the EU. The other direction, no problem.

How can you negotiate the politics in a foreign language in which you are not completely (really) fluent?

Our victory in dominating the world with our language (via our large teenage offspring the USA) has meant that almost all Brits are not equipped to follow a career path in full in the EU, whereas the USA, Canada, Oz and NZ are possible

I worked with a programme manager who had the right idea: live in the Pyrenees, commute to the UK

Even better live in Spain or Cyprus, and work from home for a UK firm

I'd try this if I didn't have teenage kids in the UK

ICBM

Evilmags said:

Wow, the same people arguing to null and void a referendum, the most proportional of all elections, then argue for proportional representation. Left wing hypocrisy is seriously such a contradiction in logic that it never fails to leave me stunned. If you cant see the (blindingly obvious) contradictions between both positions, please, just stop voting....

You could not possibly be more wrong.

A binary choice referendum is the least proportional of all elections. In the case of the closest possible result, one vote among the millions cast is enough to change the result from one extreme to the other.

I have no idea what left or right wing have to do with it either, it's completely irrelevant to any discussion of voting systems.

AliGorie

lonin all'a this going on - if it's allowed to run it's course  we may just get something positive outa it all.

AliGorie

that should read 'lovin'

holnrew

If we're arguing class, I'm poor as shit and voted remain.

skankdelvar

Let's have a look at Mishcon's objectives in their own words:

 'We must ensure that the Government follows the correct process to have legal certainty and protect the UK Constitution and the sovereignty of Parliament in these unprecedented circumstances. The result of the Referendum is not in doubt, but we need a process that follows UK law to enact it. The outcome of the Referendum itself is not legally binding and for the current or future Prime Minister to invoke Article 50 without the approval of Parliament is unlawful.

We must make sure this is done properly for the benefit of all UK citizens. Article 50 simply cannot be invoked without a full debate and vote in Parliament. Everyone in Britain needs the Government to apply the correct constitutional process and allow Parliament to fulfil its democratic duty which is to take into account the results of the Referendum along with other factors and make the ultimate decision.'

Well, that's pretty clear then. Mishcon's think the referendum wasn't binding and that Parliament should take other factors into account before making the ultimate decision.

If that's not a clear statement that the people alone don't get to decide and there's more to it all than just a simple referendum and that there should be a second 'ultimate decision' - which itself admits the possibility of not invoking Article 50.

In other words, back in your box, stupid people; it's the lawyers and the politicians who own this country, not you. Masterly stuff and a position with which those ghastly, unrepentant Leavers will be entirely relaxed, I'm sure.

Do we really think that the so-called underclass can't hear this conversation we're all having? And that it hasn't confirmed to them once and for all that the middle-classes want to do them down? We didn't see trouble coming before the referendum but I can sure see it now. 

If this legal manoeuvre goes ahead or - worse - succeeds in changing the outcome just wait for the blowback. It'll be ugly.

littlegreenman

skankdelvar said:

Let's have a look at Mishcon's objectives in their own words:

 'We must ensure that the Government follows the correct process to have legal certainty and protect the UK Constitution and the sovereignty of Parliament in these unprecedented circumstances. The result of the Referendum is not in doubt, but we need a process that follows UK law to enact it. The outcome of the Referendum itself is not legally binding and for the current or future Prime Minister to invoke Article 50 without the approval of Parliament is unlawful.

We must make sure this is done properly for the benefit of all UK citizens. Article 50 simply cannot be invoked without a full debate and vote in Parliament. Everyone in Britain needs the Government to apply the correct constitutional process and allow Parliament to fulfil its democratic duty which is to take into account the results of the Referendum along with other factors and make the ultimate decision.'

Well, that's pretty clear then. Mishcon's think the referendum wasn't binding and that Parliament should take other factors into account before making the ultimate decision.

If that's not a clear statement that the people alone don't get to decide and there's more to it all than just a simple referendum and that there should be a second 'ultimate decision' - which itself admits the possibility of not invoking Article 50.

In other words, back in your box, stupid people; it's the lawyers and the politicians who own this country, not you. Masterly stuff and a position with which those ghastly, unrepentant Leavers will be entirely relaxed, I'm sure.

Do we really think that the so-called underclass can't hear this conversation we're all having? And that it hasn't confirmed to them once and for all that the middle-classes want to do them down? We didn't see trouble coming before the referendum but I can sure see it now. 

If this legal manoeuvre goes ahead or - worse - succeeds in changing the outcome just wait for the blowback. It'll be ugly.

And see how with a slightly different set of highlighting says something else entirely. Round and round it goes!

digitalscream

skankdelvar said:

Let's have a look at Mishcon's objectives in their own words:

 'We must ensure that the Government follows the correct process to have legal certainty and protect the UK Constitution and the sovereignty of Parliament in these unprecedented circumstances. The result of the Referendum is not in doubt, but we need a process that follows UK law to enact it. The outcome of the Referendum itself is not legally binding and for the current or future Prime Minister to invoke Article 50 without the approval of Parliament is unlawful.

We must make sure this is done properly for the benefit of all UK citizens. Article 50 simply cannot be invoked without a full debate and vote in Parliament. Everyone in Britain needs the Government to apply the correct constitutional process and allow Parliament to fulfil its democratic duty which is to take into account the results of the Referendum along with other factors and make the ultimate decision.'

Well, that's pretty clear then. Mishcon's think the referendum wasn't binding and that Parliament should take other factors into account before making the ultimate decision.

If that's not a clear statement that the people alone don't get to decide and there's more to it all than just a simple referendum and that there should be a second 'ultimate decision' - which itself admits the possibility of not invoking Article 50.

In other words, back in your box, stupid people; it's the lawyers and the politicians who own this country, not you. Masterly stuff and a position with which those ghastly, unrepentant Leavers will be entirely relaxed, I'm sure.

Do we really think that the so-called underclass can't hear this conversation we're all having? And that it hasn't confirmed to them once and for all that the middle-classes want to do them down? We didn't see trouble coming before the referendum but I can sure see it now. 

If this legal manoeuvre goes ahead or - worse - succeeds in changing the outcome just wait for the blowback. It'll be ugly.

Except...the problem is that the referendum was never binding. If you thought it was, you've either been living in a cave for the last year or you've just stuck your fingers in your ears every time somebody tried to explain how it works to you.

Everything they said is correct. I don't understand what the problem is here - the case is not to force anybody to reconsider or even to force them to take other factors into account; it can't do that (although it seems that'd be a nice aside for them). It's to force the PM tasked with triggering Article 50 to obey the law; almost everything I've read suggests that a PM cannot repeal an Act of Parliament, which is what it would take to trigger Article 50. If Article 50 is triggered without repealing the Act, then we're Schrodinger's Country - simultaneously in the EU and out of it. Ironically, the only way that gets sorted out is by the EU kicking us out at the end of the two years' grace period and literally ripping that Act out of our statutes (which is precisely what the Leave campaign said was wrong with the whole thing in the first place).

If you want the PM to have the absolute final say on which laws we have and which ones we don't, without going through Parliament, then I'm amazed that you even bothered to vote in the referendum.

So, ask yourself this: if you can put aside the class-based chip on your shoulder for a minute, would you rather have Brexit be safe and solid, or shaky and open to challenge and repeal? If it's the former, you should support this lawsuit. If it's the latter, carry on as you are.

Heartfeltdawn

skankdelvar said:

Well, that's pretty clear then. Mishcon's think the referendum wasn't binding and that Parliament should take other factors into account before making the ultimate decision.

If that's not a clear statement that the people alone don't get to decide and there's more to it all than just a simple referendum and that there should be a second 'ultimate decision' - which itself admits the possibility of not invoking Article 50.

And Mishcon is not the only group who thinks it was not binding because you have to have something in place to say whether a referendum is binding or not. The 2011 AV vote had such an element to it. It's there in the Commons library online. David Allen Green in the FT provided a short summation a week prior to the referendum. 

https://next.ft.com/content/5b82031e-1056-31e1-8e0e-4e91774e27f1

So if there are no legal triggers in there as there was with the AV referendum, what is there that forces a government to activate Article 50? 

Clarky

ToneControl said:

Brits are dreaming if they think the EU is an open door to working abroad. Almost zero Brits have language skills that could equip them, and only very specialist skills like for example IT, engineering or Banking could ever get you a job in the EU

I'm saying it's a one way street. Almost no-one ever from the Uk will succeed in a career in the EU. The other direction, no problem.

How can you negotiate the politics in a foreign language in which you are not completely (really) fluent?

this is not completely true

setting aside my family that are actually Spanish

I have English family in Spain that have been there for more than 15 years [which btw are not in contact with my Spanish family]..

none of them are IT, engineering or banking

my stepdad set up a successful business there, my bro-in-law is a plasterer, sis owned and ran a bar for a while but now works in a casino..

I know / have met many of their British and non-Spanish friends out there too and none of them work in any of the industries you listed. They do all kinds of stuff and most of them only speak very rudimentary Spanish [pretty sad in my opinion], but somehow they manage to get by [bi-lingual lawyers / contacts etc]..

of my English family that live there, my nieces and nephew speak 'native' Spanish [cos they were either very young when they moved there or born there], my sister is fluent but has a shit accent and crap grammar [but still much better than me], my mum is reasonably conversational, and my bro-in-law and stepdad are not very good at speaking it at all…

that said, they [like their friends] are resourceful and manage to find a way.. and manage to make a nice living..

wife's bro has lived in Germany for 20 years and does dry lining and plastering..

he went there only speaking English and what he learned after a year of German evening classes before he went [he's fluent now]..

settled down with a German girlie years ago.. etc etc..

also, a pal of mine is an engineer in Amsterdam working for a large US telecoms company

his Dutch is very limited [according to my Dutch pals] but he is a skilled engineer and the spoken language of the company is English..

from what I gather, he's been there more than 10 years and is doing pretty good..

My cousin Trish is English but lives in The Hague [20+ years]..

she's a DJ and dance teacher.. didn't speak Dutch when she arrived but does now fluently

not every job / career path for a Brit in the EU involves a large corp..

and most folk just go without knowing the language and then figure stuff out when they get there..

I think it's quite impressive actually to have that sort of bottle..

and of all the Brits I know in the EU [apart from my mate in the telco in the NL] they all do all sorts of stuff [bars, cafes, building trades, property etc..]

you'd be really surprised...

skankdelvar

littlegreenman said:

And see how with a slightly different set of highlighting says something else entirely. Round and round it goes!

Quite so. I accept that the Mishcon press release may be subject to an interpretation different to my own (which is - to be fair - deliberately provocative). As I say, I don't actually have a problem with people hiring lawyers. 

But I can empathise with how other people might see it and that's the view I'm trying to convey. For example, someone in a no-hope shit-hole existence can't just pick up a phone and get a big firm of lawyers to nudge things along. Or use articulate pseudo-legalese to make their case. 

Jesus, don't you people get satire?

digitalscream said:

So, ask yourself this: if you can put aside the class-based chip on your shoulder for a minute...

It was all going so well and I was prepared to take what you said on board. Then you threw in the personal ad-hominem. 

That was when you lost the argument forever; when your 'disgust' so overwhelmed you that you stopped listening. I'm very disappointed. Really.

Heartfeltdawn said:

And Mishcon is not the only group who thinks it was not binding because you have to have something in place to say whether a referendum is binding or not. The 2011 AV vote had such an element to it. It's there in the Commons library online. David Allen Green in the FT provided a short summation a week prior to the referendum. 

https://next.ft.com/content/5b82031e-1056-31e1-8e0e-4e91774e27f1

So if there are no legal triggers in there as there was with the AV referendum, what is there that forces a government to activate Article 50? 

Thank you for the link. Seeing as I voted Remain (though I'm beginning to regret it) I can probably handle a reversal. But I really think we'll be opening a whole other Pandora's box if there's any apparent 'shenanigans'. 

It won't be the well-protected, leafy suburbs that bear the brunt of any resultant fury. But that's what nobody seems to get.

digitalscream

skankdelvar said:

digitalscream said:

So, ask yourself this: if you can put aside the class-based chip on your shoulder for a minute...

It was all going so well and I was prepared to take what you said on board. Then you threw in the personal ad-hominem. 

That was when you lost the argument forever; when your 'disgust' so overwhelmed you that you stopped listening. I'm very disappointed. Really.

So...your post is deliberately provocative and full of class-based slurs, but when somebody calls you on it...you can never listen to them again?

Bit foolish, son. Does explain the tone of your posts on the subject, though.