*/
Senior lawyers, business leaders and academics urged the government to give MPs the power to block an ‘unpatriotic Brexit’ if the Prime Minister, Theresa May, does not strike a deal that is in the national interest.
A letter in The Times newspaper, organised by Mark Stephens, a media law partner at London firm Howard Kennedy, came as peers began to debate the controversial ‘Brexit Bill’.
It said: ‘We believe Parliament should amend the Article 50 notification bill to ensure that it can determine what should be done if negotiations break down.
‘Parliament’s vote on any emerging settlement must also permit, if the terms are not in the national interest, amendment or extension of the negotiations, and to allow the country the option of an alternative relationship with the EU, including the possibility of membership.’
Signatories included Baroness Kennedy QC, Ben Emmerson QC, of Matrix Chambers, Alexander Layton QC, of 20 Essex Street, Peter Montegriffo QC, John Vater QC, of Harcourt Chambers, Tim Ward QC and Jon Turner QC, of Monckton Chambers, and Jolyon Maugham QC, of Devereux Chambers.
It followed an opinion from three of the UK’s most senior EU law experts – Sir David Edward QC, Sir Francis Jacobs QC, and Sir Jeremy Lever QC, commissioned by law firm Bindmans. Dubbed the ‘three knights opinion’, it suggested that the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill does not authorise Brexit and that a further Act of Parliament would be required if it is to occur in a way that is lawful.
Parliament passed the Brexit Bill unamended on 13 March.
Senior lawyers, business leaders and academics urged the government to give MPs the power to block an ‘unpatriotic Brexit’ if the Prime Minister, Theresa May, does not strike a deal that is in the national interest.
A letter in The Times newspaper, organised by Mark Stephens, a media law partner at London firm Howard Kennedy, came as peers began to debate the controversial ‘Brexit Bill’.
It said: ‘We believe Parliament should amend the Article 50 notification bill to ensure that it can determine what should be done if negotiations break down.
‘Parliament’s vote on any emerging settlement must also permit, if the terms are not in the national interest, amendment or extension of the negotiations, and to allow the country the option of an alternative relationship with the EU, including the possibility of membership.’
Signatories included Baroness Kennedy QC, Ben Emmerson QC, of Matrix Chambers, Alexander Layton QC, of 20 Essex Street, Peter Montegriffo QC, John Vater QC, of Harcourt Chambers, Tim Ward QC and Jon Turner QC, of Monckton Chambers, and Jolyon Maugham QC, of Devereux Chambers.
It followed an opinion from three of the UK’s most senior EU law experts – Sir David Edward QC, Sir Francis Jacobs QC, and Sir Jeremy Lever QC, commissioned by law firm Bindmans. Dubbed the ‘three knights opinion’, it suggested that the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill does not authorise Brexit and that a further Act of Parliament would be required if it is to occur in a way that is lawful.
Parliament passed the Brexit Bill unamended on 13 March.
Now is the time to tackle inappropriate behaviour at the Bar as well as extend our reach and collaboration with organisations and individuals at home and abroad
A comparison – Dan Monaghan, Head of DWF Chambers, invites two viewpoints
And if not, why not? asks Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the many benefits of oral fluid drug testing for child welfare and protection matters
To mark International Women’s Day, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management looks at how financial planning can help bridge the gap
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs answers some of the most common questions regarding relationship DNA testing for court
Maria Scotland and Niamh Wilkie report from the Bar Council’s 2024 visit to the United Arab Emirates exploring practice development opportunities for the England and Wales family Bar
Marking Neurodiversity Week 2025, an anonymous barrister shares the revelations and emotions from a mid-career diagnosis with a view to encouraging others to find out more
David Wurtzel analyses the outcome of the 2024 silk competition and how it compares with previous years, revealing some striking trends and home truths for the profession
Save for some high-flyers and those who can become commercial arbitrators, it is generally a question of all or nothing but that does not mean moving from hero to zero, says Andrew Hillier
