Zubeneschamali wrote: » A real example which tied up our legal and legislative system for 35 years.
lawred2 wrote: » But surely the same reasoning applied in the English courts? I'm not arguing for anything here just curious why the English High Court ruling would be considered so obviously unreasonable as to be so likely to be overturned by the Supreme Court.
lawred2 wrote: » Either way - when the topic at hand is prorogation - I doubt an Irish government could go to the people with a constitutional amendment that meant that any future government could suspend parliament at will for as long as they deemed advantageous..
Akrasia wrote: » The English case was heard in the High Court, the appeal is being heard in the Supreme court
Akrasia wrote: » It is not uncommon for lower courts to rule in favour of the status quo when there is any doubt about precedent, while the Supreme court (relatively new and all that it is) is in the business of creating legal precedent where there wasn't one before.
WomanSkirtFan8 wrote: » There can't be any changes to the our constitution here in Ireland without a referendum put the people first
lawred2 wrote: » re they not as conservative where precedent is concerned?
lawred2 wrote: » so - what's the difference then between the Scottish courts and the English courts? Are they not as conservative where precedent is concerned?
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Scotland doesn't just have its own courts, it has its own laws.
54and56 wrote: » They are a very well established German company so will do things by the book. They won't have taken the decision lightly but they know (or are very confident) a No Deal Brexit would be such a disaster that shutting down is the correct commercial decision to make.
lawred2 wrote: » I understand that. So inferred in what you've just said is that prorogation was deemed illegal in Scotland on a point of law? Is that the case? It's still a common law system as far as I was aware.
lawred2 wrote: » urm I think that's sarcasm but as I'm straying into waters deeper than I'm comfortable with - I'm not so sure. I thought uncodified constitutions were in the minority.
Akrasia wrote: » The case was originally rejected on the same basis as the English high court that the courts did not have jurisdiction over the HOC Parliamentary procedure, but it was appealed to a bench of 3 Court of Session Judges (supreme court in Scotland) who heard arguments that this instance was more than just a normal parliamentary procedure and that Johnson was acting in bad faith to bypass parliament which is supposed to be sovereign. Once these arguments have ruled upon, and the Scottish appeals court found against Johnson on these arguments, the Supreme Court will have to consider this judgement and I cannot see them ruling that Johnson has the legal right to request a prorogation for any cause and for any duration. It would be absolutely ludicrous and the implications for UK democracy would be catastrophic.
geffbyupy wrote: » How do you think the next election will work out in the Six Counties? I doubt there will be a nationalist majority but I would bet that the DUP will lose a seat and SF will gain one, probably from that Nigel Dodds in North Belfast or Emma Pengelly in South Belfast, which previously had an SDLP seat.
Enzokk wrote: » I didn't watch all of the morning proceedings, but Lord Keen is painful in his delivery. I hope for his sake that this doesn't play a role as there is no flow to the way he is presenting his arguments and even accounting for the stop-start nature of the proceeding with questions being asked, he seems to break his own momentum constantly and it does seem like he has delayed answering a few questions already.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Very different to Pannick this morning, he was very smooth. Questions seemed to be helping him make points, not stopping him in his tracks.
Enzokk wrote: » From the little I saw this morning that was my impression as well. I cannot help but notice that Lord Keen wasn't keen to address why there was not signed statement on the reason for the prorogation other than there are other documents and that means it really isn't an issue. That seems to be missing the point. He was also asked on the reasons for prorogation and why they wanted to include the recess period, and for me he didn't address these at all. I wish I knew whether this meant anything or if in fact the way he avoided answering pointed questions actually means more than avoiding the answers. That is it for today though, back again tomorrow for more. Just a quick follow up to see what Mark Francois is up to, and it is only to suggest violence in case he doesn't get his way.https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1173942067631972353?s=20
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Francois could well be right. The Telegraph, Express and Mail have whipped up English nationalism in a way that I haven't seen before. They have abandoned any pretence of independent reportage as a quick scan of their headlines will show. Ditto the ERG and Brexit Party.
Akrasia wrote: » No Matter who the Labour leader is, they will be character assassinated by the UK press and the troll army If Labour were clever they would announce a change of leader the day before an election, so that all of the Tory campaigning which will be entirely focused on how bad Corbyn is, would be immediately neutralised, and they wouldn't have the time to poison the public against whoever the new Labour leader happened to be. Chances of this happening are zero due to the egos and personalities involved
Infini wrote: » Honestly I would be of the opinion of so what, if you dont tackle it now you get riots when people have their rights and other benefits removed because of Brexit. THe simple truth is the Telegraph, Mail, Express and the sun are propaganda rags peddling bull and lies and need to be held to account for publshing such distorted rubbish to begin with. The ERG are a bunch of self serving clowns and I'm pretty sure they've some rather nasty stuff hidden in the closet it doesnt take a genius to figure out they're purely out engineering this for their own benefit and not the country and as for the Brexit "party" they're just a front for other's namely that troll Farage, no policies, no idea's, only Brexit or Riot. I'd be honest if there's a serious investigation into these wasters I wouldn't be suprised if theres more than a few dirty secrets buried there, follow the money and you find out who the real puppeteers of this are.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Indeed. But many people no longer want facts, explanations or depth. They want simple slogans that feed into their sense of Englishness and their sense of entitlement. So these papers and politicians tell them what they want to hear. Much like Trump supporters, they don't care about any secrets or realities. They just want to believe in something and someone. Brexit and Brexiteers answer that call perfectly.
CrabRevolution wrote: » The UK press seem to have it both ways for criticising Labour. Elect a Corbyn type as leader and they vilify him as an evil communist who'll ruin the country. Elect a centrist and they'll be accused of being a "Blairite" and out of touch with the real Labour core.
Strazdas wrote: » Best guess is that this leads to the break up of the UK. It seems to be mainly England going through this craziness.
