Brexit vote 'not legally binding' says Supreme Court judge

Lady Hale is one of the Supreme Court judges hearing the Government's appeal against the legal challenge to Brexit next month

Siobhan Fenton
Social Affairs Correspondent
Tuesday 15 November 2016 14:40
Comments
Baroness Hale of Richmond, also known as Lady Hale
Baroness Hale of Richmond, also known as Lady Hale

The EU referendum was not legally binding, a Supreme Court judge hearing the Government’s appeal against the Brexit legal challenge has said ahead of the December court case.

Lady Brenda Hale made the comments in a speech to lawyers in Kuala Lumpar, during which she reflected on the upcoming case. All parties in the litigation accept the referendum is not legally binding.

Following the referendum result, a Government promise made six years prior resurfaced that any referendum "cannot be legally binding", but rather is advisory.

Lady Hale is one of eleven justices in the Supreme Court to hear the legal challenge to Brexit in December. All of the justices are due to hear the case due to the importance of the hearing for constitutional law, as well as wider power dynamics between the executive and legislature. The case considers whether the High Court was right to rule the Government must get parliamentary approval before triggering Article 50.

Landmark Brexit Ruling: What happened and what happens next?

Last month the High Court ruled against the Government and backed anti-Brexit campaigners in pronouncing parliament must be consulted before Article 50 can be triggered. It is expected that such a requirement could delay Brexit, or result in it appearing in a softer approach compared to ‘Hard Brexit’ plans. The case was taken by investment managed Gina Miller, as well as a crowd-funded coalition of 'concerned citizens' known as the Peoples' Challenge.

Speaking ahead of the appeal hearing, which begins 5 December, Lady Hale told an audience of lawyers at a Kuala Lumpar lecture on constitutional law that the upcoming appeal is one of “fundamental constitutional importance”. She said: “As is well known, the referendum on whether the United Kingdom should leave or remain in the European Union produced a majority of 51.8 per cent in favour of leaving. But that referendum was not legally binding on Parliament.”

Referring to the Government’s previous defence that Theresa May as the executive wing of the government has power to trigger Article 50 without parliamentary or judicial interference, Lady Hale said: “Perhaps significantly, the Government has given up the argument that the issue is not justiciable in our courts.”

Nicola Sturgeon: Scotland look to intervene in Brexit legal case

The appeal case begins on 5 December and is expected to run until 8 December. A judgment is expected by the end of December.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in