I see the village to the North has had it's elders declare that we are bad in Westminster and have broken the law. Lets see what the grown ups down at the High Court (the real one) say.... can't see parliament resitting anytime soon .... Hard Brexit anyone?
Eh? The E&W High Court has already ruled in Miller, and it found in favour of HM Govt in that it held that the decision to prorogate was not a justiciable issue. The Scottish court which handed down judgement in Cherry yesterday (the Inner Session House) is the equivalent of the Court of Appeal, ie: it outranks the High Court and is comprised of more senior judges. Therefore, you’ve got it completely the wrong way around, and to adopt your terminology, the Scottish judges were actually “the grown ups”
forgive him, he survives on a mixture of Guinness and barbiturates. half the time, he knows not what he says. and the other half nor do we.
true that. but when I want you to understand. you will. anyways, from a layman. and probably why they call it a constitutional crisis. the Court of Session operates under Scots law. The case has been brought up on Scots law and the rule was issued by judges operating under Scots law. So I think I am right to ask here what law is going to be used as a basis in the ruling of that England supreme court? is that going to be English law? if so why? I am sure that I am not the only one that, well aware of the differences between Scots and English law with regards to where sovereignty is placed, the challenge initiated in a Scots law court and the challenge initiated in an English court operating under English law must be run separately. Why? Because it may be legitimate for the kingdom of England to have a PM and a monarch acting as absolute rulers by closing down parliament but it most certainly it is not for Scotland under our Claim of Right and Declaration of Arbroath. And let's face it, if it is not legal under Scots law and for Scotland, then IT IS NOT legal for the UK as a whole because the Kingdom of England on its own is not the UK.
You make a good point Finm and I don’t know the answer off the top of my head. However, it may be that the contradictory rulings may not be due to any conflict of laws. It may be that the Scottish Inner Session House simply thought that the E&W High Court got it wrong and that the decision to prorogate is in fact amenable to JR. However, although the Inner House outranks the High Court, its decisions do not bind it and so the Cherry appeal judgement doesn’t override/overrule the Miller High Court decision. As to what happens when both of the cases are heard by the SC and if there turns out to be a conflict between Scots and E&W law, then although I think I know the answer, I’m not sure, so I’m not going to guess.
Doesn’t the Supreme Court have U.K. wide jurisdiction? I think we will find that the case will be biased towards English Law, with perhaps referencing Scots Law, but little more. Parliament has ignored The Act of Union before when it imposed council tax in Scotland before rUK. The AoU states that you cannot tax one part of the union differently than another. Eg, as a student I was paying council tax while my cousin in London was not
Yes it does. Something else which is in the mix is that the SC will also be hearing a NI appeal at the same time as the Miller and Cherry cases, in which I believe that one of the arguments is that a no deal Brexit contravenes the Good Friday Agreement. The judgement of the Belfast High Court in that case is due to be handed down this morning and then they'll doubtless also be off to the SC as well (although I think it has to go via the CA of NI first) for a 3 day conjoined appeal hearing alongside Miller and Cherry starting next Tuesday, the 17th.
Just read this fantastic quote from an unnamed Conservative MP who is one of the 21 rebels who are now on the naughty step..... “Chief whip Mark Spencer has now written to some of them, confirming that they are entitled to appeal the decision – and hinting that future loyalty to the government could boost their cause. One of the 21 MPs said: “It was one of the most self-unaware letters I’ve received in some time. From people who are serially disloyal and decimated their own minority government. I don’t want it back ... “All it did in my local community was confirm that the Conservative party is now led by a narrow sect who wouldn’t be out of place in the Muppet version of the Handmaiden’s tale. It’s like being asked by its captain if you want to get back on the Titanic.” Mic. Drop.
“All it did in my local community was confirm that the Conservative party is now led by a narrow sect . https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/09/really-a-right-wing-coup/
Wow. “It is particularly worrying that so many people are happy to see dictatorship established so long as it expedites Brexit. This demonstrates the folly of introducing elements of direct democracy into a representative democracy. I am perfectly content for England and Wales to be outside the EU, though I regard extending that to being outside the customs union and single market as economic madness driven by xenophobia. I am sorry to say I do not maintain a romantic view of the electorate, having for a considerable while dwelled amongst a remarkable percentage of open racists in Ramsgate, a UKIP hotspot where Farage chose to stand. The idea that the crowd should directly wield unmediated power of executive action is almost as repugnant to me as the continued existence of the monarchy. As so often, I appreciate my views do not fit into a standard and easily labeled set of opinions and many of you may disagree. They are however my opinions and I present them with no insistence you agree, but in the hope that you will consider and discuss.” Pretty much a less pithy version of that aphorism which is attributed to Winston Churchill: “the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with your average voter”
I think the Scottish peoples supremacy was in place before the declaration of Arbroath, there was a previous document which allowed the people (actually nobility) to displace John Balliol as an unsuitable king and replace him with Robert 1st (the Bruce)
i'v no idea bud. i'm famillier with the concept of scottish sovernty and the claim of right. but i guess its all political oppinion untill its proven in law. i think this is part of a process that will lead to the probing and testing of the claim of right and the abilty of the scottish electorate via scottish MP's to end the union.
it will come as no surprise that yer man is a republican. he also voted for brexit. he stated his reason for voting the way he did because of the silence from the EU over the treatment of the catalans by the spanish authorities.
Am sitting on a bar stool in a BMW Dealership and I almost fell off it laughing at the above. Trying to do some work here. Please make it stop!
I think you are right and the Claim of Right and Sovereignty of the people will become centre stage, sooner or later
