This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/05/supreme-court-sets-the-scene-for-latest-twists-in-brexit-tale
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Supreme court sets the scene for latest twists in Brexit tale | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| Like Kevin Spacey’s character in The Usual Suspects, a mystery name echoed around the supreme court on Monday during otherwise dry legal argument over the government’s right to leave the European Union. Instead of “Who is Keyser Söze?”, the question on the lips of the 11 justices and dozens of lawyers was: “What does Keyser tell us?” | Like Kevin Spacey’s character in The Usual Suspects, a mystery name echoed around the supreme court on Monday during otherwise dry legal argument over the government’s right to leave the European Union. Instead of “Who is Keyser Söze?”, the question on the lips of the 11 justices and dozens of lawyers was: “What does Keyser tell us?” |
| The Keyser in this instance is De Keyser, a luxury hotel on the Thames that was requisitioned during the first world war to house officers in some opulence but then became a byword for government overreach when the owners successfully sued for compensation. | The Keyser in this instance is De Keyser, a luxury hotel on the Thames that was requisitioned during the first world war to house officers in some opulence but then became a byword for government overreach when the owners successfully sued for compensation. |
| The landmark 1920 legal judgment was one of a number of historical cases bandied back and forth in the supreme court as it attempted to judge whether parliament should be consulted before the government begins the far more vexed process of leaving the EU. | The landmark 1920 legal judgment was one of a number of historical cases bandied back and forth in the supreme court as it attempted to judge whether parliament should be consulted before the government begins the far more vexed process of leaving the EU. |
| Other surprise cameos in this dramatic twist of the Brexit tale were played by the 1970s airline entrepreneur Sir Freddie Laker, the Stuart monarch King James I, and another test case involving the Fire Brigades Union. | Other surprise cameos in this dramatic twist of the Brexit tale were played by the 1970s airline entrepreneur Sir Freddie Laker, the Stuart monarch King James I, and another test case involving the Fire Brigades Union. |
| But it was the De Keyser role that presented the most obvious challenge for government lawyer James Eadie QC. In theory, it establishes a precedent that where parliament has intervened already – originally by setting out terms for wartime compensation, and now through the 1972 European Communities Act – the government cannot simply turn to the prerogative of Stuart kings for its independent authority. | But it was the De Keyser role that presented the most obvious challenge for government lawyer James Eadie QC. In theory, it establishes a precedent that where parliament has intervened already – originally by setting out terms for wartime compensation, and now through the 1972 European Communities Act – the government cannot simply turn to the prerogative of Stuart kings for its independent authority. |
| Eadie decided to tackle this head on, repeatedly invoking the name of the long-forgotten luxury hotel as he argued that the government maintains its historic prerogative to conduct foreign treaties despite the shared role of parliament in taking Britain into the EU. | Eadie decided to tackle this head on, repeatedly invoking the name of the long-forgotten luxury hotel as he argued that the government maintains its historic prerogative to conduct foreign treaties despite the shared role of parliament in taking Britain into the EU. |
| “You know, I hope, and think, and if not, someone had better shout, but you know the background and the nature of the facts,” he told the justices. “The army council requisitioned a hotel for the use of the Royal Flying Corps and it denied the hotel owners a right to compensation.” Just to make sure, he made them read key passages of the landmark judgment in an effort to show that things were different in the case at hand. | “You know, I hope, and think, and if not, someone had better shout, but you know the background and the nature of the facts,” he told the justices. “The army council requisitioned a hotel for the use of the Royal Flying Corps and it denied the hotel owners a right to compensation.” Just to make sure, he made them read key passages of the landmark judgment in an effort to show that things were different in the case at hand. |
| Ironically, De Keyser was founded by a Belgian immigrant on a site a mile or so down river from the courtroom, on land now occupied by Anglo-Dutch multinational Unilever. | Ironically, De Keyser was founded by a Belgian immigrant on a site a mile or so down river from the courtroom, on land now occupied by Anglo-Dutch multinational Unilever. |
| Another challenge to the government’s authority also kept popping up in the guise of Laker Airways Ltd v Department of Trade, which found that the government had similarly overstepped its power to ignore legislation by preventing the launch of Skytrain, a low-cost competitor to British Airways. | Another challenge to the government’s authority also kept popping up in the guise of Laker Airways Ltd v Department of Trade, which found that the government had similarly overstepped its power to ignore legislation by preventing the launch of Skytrain, a low-cost competitor to British Airways. |
| In the end, argued Eadie, the right of ministers to invoke article 50 and thus alone begin the process of leaving the EU relies on power far older than 1970s budget airlines or first world war-era hotels. The power inherited from kings and first tested in the 1611 Case of Proclamations is no “ancient relic”, claims the government, but a “‘fundamental pillar of our constitutional state”. | In the end, argued Eadie, the right of ministers to invoke article 50 and thus alone begin the process of leaving the EU relies on power far older than 1970s budget airlines or first world war-era hotels. The power inherited from kings and first tested in the 1611 Case of Proclamations is no “ancient relic”, claims the government, but a “‘fundamental pillar of our constitutional state”. |