= Сообщение: 8944 из 12489 ====================================== ENET.SYSOP = От : David Rance 2:203/2 14 Sep 19 11:07:12 Кому : Michiel van der Vlist 14 Sep 19 11:07:12 Тема : Brexit FGHI : area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:203/2+5d7cadbe На : area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:280/5555+5d7c17c2 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: ASCII ================================== Ответ: area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:280/5555+5d7df4af ============================================================================== On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 23:42:54 Michiel van der Vlist -> David Rance wrote:
MvdV> On Wednesday September 11 2019 19:02, you wrote to me:
DR>>>> But the news this morning is that the Scottish Supreme Court has DR>>>> ruled that the prorogation of Parliament was illegal on the DR>>>> basis that Boris called it for his own selfish reasons.
MvdV>>> I am puzzled. My intuition says that a Scottish court has MvdV>>> jurisdiction in Scotland. Not in the rest of the UK. Am I wong?
DR>> No, you're not wrong. But the ruling of the Scottish Supreme Court is DR>> a precedent. When it comes to be discussed in the UK Supreme Court, DR>> the precedent of the Scottish Court will probably be taken into DR>> account. This is how the legal system in the UK works.
MvdV> I am still confused. So the Scottish Supreme court set a precedent by MvdV> ruling on an issue outside their jurisdiction? I'd say that would make MvdV> such a ruling null and void...
Since Scotland sends MPs to Westminster it's not really outside their jurisdiction. They were asked for a ruling which affects Scottish MPs.
Scotland is still part of the UK and any ruling passed in a lower court will be considered by a higher court. I wrote "taken into account", i.e. the UK supreme court will consider the reasoning behind the Scottish court's decision and either decide to agree with it or not as the case may be. It's simply a legal matter, not a political one.
DR>>>> Next week the UK Supreme Court will also consider the subject.
MvdV>>> Is that the equivalent of a US Federal Court?
DR>> I suppose so, although Scotland has a supreme Court because of DR>> devolution. England doesn't have one.
MvdV> What about Wales and Northern Ireland?
Scotland has always had more independence in legal matters than Wales or Northern Ireland and they had their own legal system even before devolution.
No, Wales and Northern Ireland don't have their own supreme court, however the UK supreme court will sit in turn in each of the four nations.
DR>>>> Also the Labour Party cannot decide whether to have another DR>>>> referendum before or after the next election!
MvdV>>> If they can not choose, someone else will make the choice for MvdV>>> them...
DR>> No, someone else won't. If the Labour Party win the next General DR>> Election the leader (who will then be prime minister) will decide.
MvdV> If Labour wins the next election, the Leader can no longer decide to MvdV> hold a referendum /before/ the election. /That/ decision will already MvdV> have been made. Time machines do not exist.
Yes, sorry! I meant they will decide whether or not to have another referendum.
DR>>>> Oh, and if the Liberal Democrats win the next election they've DR>>>> just said that they will cancel Brexit - assuming it hasn't DR>>>> taken place, of course!
MvdV> If they do not specify the minimum conditions under which they want to MvdV> stay in the EU, they make the same mistake as the Brexiteers when they MvdV> made the people vote just "remain" or "leave" without specifying the MvdV> conditions and the consequences.
I think that by now we are aware of the conditions and consequences! Would that we had known three years ago!
David
-- David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK
