Skip to main content

"This is not the end of the road...there is still very little known about what Brexit will look like"

Sarah Ellson


United Kingdom

Sarah Ellson comments on the implications of the Supreme Court's ruling that Parliament must vote on the government's intention to trigger Article 50

The Supreme Court ruled this morning that Parliament must vote on whether the government can trigger Article 50 - to kick-off the Brexit process. Reacting to the judgment, Sarah Ellson, partner and head of the Public and Regulatory Group at Fieldfisher, said:

"This is not the end of the road.

"The Supreme Court stated that, while an Act of Parliament was required (as opposed to a Motion), it had no views on what this Act should look like.  As such, the very brief Bill that has been mooted before may now be brought before the House of Commons.

"While Theresa May's timeline of triggering Article 50 before the end of March 2017 is fast approaching, there is still time for an Act of Parliament to be passed.  In the past, emergency legislation has been passed in as little as a day - although the Government is expected to provide justification for this expedited process.

"As well as legislation needed in Westminster to trigger Article 50, there is currently another claim going through the UK courts on whether a further Act is required to leave the Single Market under Article 127 of the EEA agreement.  In addition, there is currently a case in the Irish courts asking the Irish government to refer the question of Brexit to the European Courts of Justice.

"And of course, this is just one part of the puzzle.  There is still very little known about what Brexit will look like, or how the Great Repeal Bill will work."

Sign up to our email digest

Click to subscribe or manage your email preferences.