A doctor from Glasgow is challenging the Prime Minister saying that according to Section 2 of the European Union Act 2011, a second referendum will be required before the UK could leave the EU.

He has written to the Prime Minister citing this requirement and says that once he has her response he will decide how to proceed, but has indicated that he intends to peruse the matter through the High Court.

The gist of the arguement is that the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) can not be modified without a referendum. I suspect that the government will argue tha the original referendum fulfilled this requirement, but the doctor will argue that it doesn't.

The relevant section of the European Union Act 2011 is:

Excerpt of the European Union Act 2011, Section 2

The full text of the Act can be viewed here on legislation.gov.uk

Having read the whole thing (sad isn't it), I can see some merit in this arguement, but it's tricky enough that it would have to be the courts that decide. The original intent of the Act was to protect the British people in the event that the EU attempted to change the Treaty. That's not what is happening here, but the EUA2011 may still apply.

Interesting times ...


Source: The Independent - Theresa May warned of fresh court challenge over Brexit as ‘law requires second referendum' on any agreement

(+311/+32/-697)

"Never saw off the branch you are on, unless you are being hanged from it" - Stanislaw J. Lec