[Scarlett.]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

I don't know.The government could win this appeal.They may have a good case.
Ian Duncan Smith was just talking about it.
The decision to call the referendum was a parliamentary decision in the first place.The referendum was held as decided by parliament.
The British people voted and have instructed the government to trigger article fifty(in a referendum that parliament called for).
Now the ruling of the court was that the government can't trigger article fifty without a parliamentary vote.
The court actually had no business saying this as the British people in the referendum and essentially parliament to begin with has already made the decision to trigger article fifty by calling the referendum.
It will be interesting to see how the appeal goes.
As he also said.The terms of Brexit will be debated over and over anyway.Parliament can call for a debate whenever but for the court to specifically rule that 'You cannot trigger article fifty without a vote in parliament' when it has already been voted on by calling the referendum gives the government a decent case in the appeal.
That's just what he said anyway.He may be wrong but we'll have to wait and see.

The referendum was advisory, not legally binding.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Chewy

The referendum was advisory, not legally binding.

That is the defence the remoaners will keep trying.However the country was told on numerous occasions by the PM himself before the referendum that whatever Britain decides is what is happening.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

That is the defence the remoaners will keep trying.However the country was told on numerous occasions by the PM himself before the referendum that whatever Britain decides is what is happening.

Defence? Its factual, this isnt a defence.. I think at this point most leavers recognise this.