Legal action has been initiated against the UK Government to compel it to seek authorisation from Parliament before it can trigger Art 50. Various suggestions have been put forward as to how such legal action should be framed. This post argues that the most compelling case for mandatory Parliamentary Mandate for triggering Art 50 is based on the well-established constitutional principle that only Parliament may abrogate fundamental rights (the ‘Legality Principle’). It will be shown that part of the Legality Principle is that the executive (either acting under subordinate legislation or Royal Prerogative) cannot abrogate fundamental rights without an Act of Parliament having express words to that effect or with necessary implication.
The European Communities Act 1972 (‘ECA’) has given domestic legal force to a series of fundamental rights, in particular (but not exclusively) to a wide array of civil and political rights recognised under the EU Charter of Fundamental…
View original post 1,479 more words
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments