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/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Fresh Brexit challenge in high court over leaving single market and EEA Fresh Brexit challenge in high court over leaving single market and EEA Fresh Brexit challenge in high court over leaving single market and EEA
(35 minutes later)
A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.
A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA. A group of four anonymous claimants – who are a mix of overseas, EU, EEA and UK nationals – have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.
The new challenges issued on Thursday will consolidate the case already initiated by the pro-single market organisation British Influence. The government and the European commission insist that the UK departs the EEA at the moment it leaves the EU. The new challenges issued on Thursday will consolidate the case already initiated by Peter Wilding and Adrian Yalland. Wilding runs the pro-single market organisation British Influence. The government and the European commission insist that the UK departs the EEA at the moment it leaves the EU.
But article 127 of the EEA agreement requires contracting parties, which include the UK, to give at least 12 months’ notice before leaving, the claimants point out. That, they maintain, implies a separate departure process from the one in article 50 of the EU treaty that has been disputed in the supreme court.But article 127 of the EEA agreement requires contracting parties, which include the UK, to give at least 12 months’ notice before leaving, the claimants point out. That, they maintain, implies a separate departure process from the one in article 50 of the EU treaty that has been disputed in the supreme court.
The claims, in the names of those identified only as W, L, T and B, have been accepted by the high court. One of the barristers involved in the new claim, S Chelvan of No5 Barristers Chambers, said: “We are seeking a declaration that the UK cannot withdraw from the EEA without the approval of HM Treasury and an act of parliament. The new claims, in the names of those identified only as W, L, T and B, have been accepted by the high court. One of the barristers involved in the claim, S Chelvan of No5 Chambers, said: “We are seeking a declaration that the UK cannot withdraw from the EEA without the approval of HM Treasury and an act of parliament.
“These are ordinary working men and women who have decided to make their futures in the UK and wish the UK to be their permanent home. One has mixed nationality; one is a non-EEA national but married to an EEA national. We are trying to highlight the various types of people who will be left in a state of limbo following our withdrawal from the EU.”“These are ordinary working men and women who have decided to make their futures in the UK and wish the UK to be their permanent home. One has mixed nationality; one is a non-EEA national but married to an EEA national. We are trying to highlight the various types of people who will be left in a state of limbo following our withdrawal from the EU.”
The European Economic Area Act 1993, Chelvan said, established EEA rights in UK domestic law. The four latest cases are being coordinated by the London law firm David Tang & Co. The lead barrister is Ramby de Mello, of No 5 Chambers, who worked with Gina Miller in the supreme court article 50 challenge. The European Economic Area Act 1993, Chelvan said, established EEA rights in UK domestic law. The four latest cases are being coordinated by the London law firm David Tang & Co. The lead barrister is Ramby de Mello, of No 5 Chambers, who represented the interested parties in Gina Miller’s supreme court article 50 challenge.
Peter Wilding, the man credited with inventing the term Brexit in 2012, has said that the British Influence claim against the Department for Exiting the European Union, headed by David Davis, could be heard as early as February. Wilding, the man credited with inventing the term Brexit in 2012, has said that his claim against the Department for Exiting the European Union, headed by David Davis, could be heard as early as February.
Responding to the British Influence case earlier this month, a government spokesman said: “The UK is party to the EEA agreement only in its capacity as an EU member state. Once the UK leaves the EU, the EEA agreement will automatically cease to apply to the UK.” Responding to the case earlier this month, a government spokesman said: “The UK is party to the EEA agreement only in its capacity as an EU member state. Once the UK leaves the EU, the EEA agreement will automatically cease to apply to the UK.”