- Location
- South Wales UK
How long is it the court proceedings.
Previous prorogations haven't been in similar circumstances, so it is hard to extrapolate from them to the present situation.1. You haven't hurt my feelings.
2. I did wonder over precedent and precedence, but picked the wrong one.Lesson learnt.
3. Was not mocking grammer education. Merely pulling mateys chain.
4. I sort of understood precedent hierarchy already.
5. I was more trying to understand that precedent must have a "pidigree" and wondered on the "Adam and Eve" of such.
6. Was wondering if the historic prorogue events quoted by Boris's solicitor yesterday afternoon had been challenged or not and do they set precedent one way or the other.........guessing those events will show the way?
I agree, and it has been / is being put, but a little more obliquely than that. The more clearly it is 'political' the more the Judiciary will want to distance themselves from it; the more 'constitutional' it can be made to seem, the less able they are to steer clear.If the majority of MPs in a Parliament (with the encouragement of an out-of-control speaker) are intent on overruling the solemn will of the people, despite previously promising to honour their wishes, it is the responsibility of the Executive (Boris and his Cabinet) to do everything in its power to wrest back control from a dishonest faction and to ensure the maintenance of democracy.
That is the argument I would put before the Supreme Court if I had the opportunity so to do.
The arguments will probably finish tomorrow, there is a remote chance they will straight away say that it's not a matter for them to decide upon. More probably they'll spread the glad tidings on Friday or Monday, but they could reserve judgement for longer if they felt it necessary.How long is it the court proceedings.
He was one of the main causes of the Brexit vote to leave but would never admit it but it is a factJohm Major trying to stop brexit today , the ultimate hypocracy
Whether you agree with me or disagree with me; like me or loathe me, don't bind my hands when I am negotiating on behalf of the British nation."
Mr Major said he was often urged by critics to rule the whole single currency issue in, or out, entirely. "It would be splendidly decisive, they say - so splendidly decisive you would send the British Prime Minister naked into that conference chamber with nothing to negotiate, with nothing to wring the best deal out of our partners.
What is all this costing the country?
Think he was referring to the cost of the court casesBrexit has cost every person in the UK £1,000, on average
Britain has missed out on £550m per week of growth since June 2016 refeerendum, according to Standard & Poor'swww.independent.co.uk
EU and international trade
Analysis, insights, guides and resources on the implications of the UK leaving the EU on 31 December 2020.economia.icaew.com
But...
This viral post about the costs of Brexit gets a lot of things wrong - Full Fact
A viral post about the “costs” of Brexit misrepresents a number of economic analyses.fullfact.org
Think he was referring to the cost of the court cases
Trivial in the grand scheme of things.
Back street Lawyers bad enough ,wonder what total bill will be there???I'll bet the barristers bills are eye watering
I don't know, but wouldn't be surprised if a fair amount is being done pro bono - it is good publicity - or at heftily discounted rate. Not those for the Gov't though...I'll bet the barristers bills are eye watering
President set for future case law .I don't know, but wouldn't be surprised if a fair amount is being done pro bono - it is good publicity - or at heftily discounted rate. Not those for the Gov't though...
Please explain...President set for future case law .
What ever the outcome will it become a pressidant for future cases then?Please explain...
Well, clearly, it will be the law unless / until Parliament legislates otherwise. Which it may or may not do; but it would be very hypocritical of those MPs claiming sovereignty to overrule the Government, not to legislate to take this hold over them away from the Supreme Court.What ever the outcome will it become a pressidant for future cases then?
As breaking new territory in realms of history?