|Author (Person)||Young, Alison L.|
|Series Title||European Law Review|
|Series Details||Vol.42, No.2, April 2017, p280-295|
|Publication Date||April 2017|
|Content Type||Journal | Series | Blog|
This article commented on the UK Supreme Court decision of January 2017 on the legality of triggering art.50. It set out the background to the decision and explained and evaluated the differences between the majority and the minority. It argued that the decision, in one sense, did not live up to the expectations generated by its publicity. It drew on longstanding principles of UK constitutional law and its outcome appeared unlikely to delay or condition the exercise of art.50.
Nevertheless, the majority focused on the constitutional impact of joining the EU and reinforced both that it was for UK law to determine the relationship between UK law and EU law, and that constitutional principles of the UK may limit the transfer of sovereignty from the UK to the EU. These elements may have more long-term consequences for EU law.
|Countries / Regions||Europe, United Kingdom|