UK can reverse Brexit Article 50, says ECJ advocate-general
The UK can unilaterally abandon the Brexit article 50 process, a senior European Court of Justice (ECJ) official ruled on Tuesday as the British parliament prepared to start five days of debate on the withdrawal agreement.
Advocate-general Campos Sánchez-Bordona said the EU law allowed the UK to revoke article 50 without requiring the formal agreement of the European Commission or other EU member states.
The pound, which has been trading near 18-month lows last month, spiked on the news, rising 0.7% against the dollar to 1.28 and 0.2% versus the euro at 1.1231.
In his formal opinion, Sánchez-Bordona said it was essential that MPs knew they could stop the Brexit process, dismissing the UK government’s claims the issue was hypothetical.
The UK government and EC had insisted the Brexit process could only be stopped by unanimous agreement. The commission opposed the case on the basis that it would allow states to renegotiate their membership on more favourable terms.
The opinion, which is not binding on the court, comes just a week after the case was heard at the ECJ following a referral from Scotland's highest civil court, the Court of Session.
It also provided encouragement for anti-Brexit campaigners as Prime Minister Theresa May kicked off a week of debate on her much-maligned Brexit deal.
MPs on Monday secured an emergency motion accusing the government of holding parliament in contempt for failing to publish the full Brexit legal advice from the government's attorney general.
House of Commons speaker John Bercow allowed opposition parties, led by Labour and the government's confidence and supply partner, the Democratic Unionist Party, to lay down a motion that will be voted on Tuesday, immediately before the start of the five-day debate on the Brexit deal.
Bercow ruled late on Monday night that he would accept a contempt motion after the parties wrote to him jointly complaining that the summary Brexit legal advice released did not comply with a Commons resolution agreed on 13 November.
He said there was “an arguable case that a contempt has been committed” after complaints that “the information released today does not constitute the final and full advice provided by the attorney general to the cabinet”.
In a letter to the speaker published on Tuesday, attorney general Geoffrey Cox argued that the government cannot be in contempt of parliament as the request from parliament was too “vague”. The government was reported to have drawn up plans to allow opposition party leaders and other senior parliamentarians access to Cox's full legal advice.