Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.


I think it is appalling to see a former Supreme Court Justice degrade the stature of our judiciary. He knows that his former role will give factual status to what is, in fact, his pro-Remain lobbying stance.

As an EU specialist lawyer, I can assure you that it is quite clear that Article 50 does not provide for revocation and, therefore, once triggered, the only way to undo it is to get all the Member States unanimously to agree to some sort of waiver/permission (by way of treaty to be ratified by all national parliaments) to allow the UK to stay in. What are the chances of that?

There is not a shred of anything on which to base an argument that Article 50 can be reversed, once triggered, whether unilaterally by the UK or by qualified majority voting of the other Member States. No, Lord Neuberger, it is not "pretty clear" as you suggest.

Further, the UK cannot unilaterally require a two year extension either. The treaty is clear on this too: an extension of the withdrawal period of "up to" (but no longer than) two years is allowed but ONLY if ALL the other Members States unanimously agree. What are the chances of that?

Shame on Lord Neuberger for pretending he is not lobbying for us to remain in the EU.

Your details