Brexit Legal Challenge: The Prime Minister has three weeks to respond

The following is the text of a media release regarding my Claim for Judicial Review of the Prime Minister's Brexit strategy.

A legal challenge has been launched in the Administrative Court in London to the Prime Minister’s Brexit strategy.

The legal challenge which names the Prime Minister as First Defendant has been launched by a retired Scottish doctor, Dr. Andrew Watt, and includes four Grounds of Claim.

The legal challenge goes to the heart of the Prime Minister’s approach to Brexit and includes a challenge to the legality of the Prime Minister’s purported notification letter of 29^th March 2017, on the grounds that the United Kingdom has not taken a decision compliant with Article 50(1) of the Treaty on European Union.

The consequence in Law, so Dr. Watt argues, is that the ongoing negotiations between the United Kingdom and the European Union are unlawful.

The most fundamental Ground of the four in Dr. Watt’s Claim is whether or not a decision compliant with Article 50(1) of the Treaty on European Union has been taken.

The Government Legal Department has been asked for some months to provide answers to the following questions:

1.      Who took the Article 50(1) of the Treaty on European Union decision?

2.      On what date did he/she/they take the decision?

3.      On what legal basis was the decision taken?

4.      What contemporary documentation exists that such a decision was taken?

Dr. Watt asked the Court to consider his Claim for Judicial Review as an urgent Claim. The Court declined to do so.

The most senior judge in London’s Administrative Court, Mr. Justice Supperstone, has however given Prime Minister Theresa May and President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, three weeks to lodge initial defences to Dr. Watt’s Claim for Judicial Review.

Dr. Watt said,

“It is urgent to resolve a number of legal issues regarding Brexit. My Claim for Judicial Review is a first step towards bringing to a halt a Brexit process which I believe to be unlawful.”

“The legal challenge to the Prime Minister’s Brexit strategy is very much in the public interest. The rights of tens of millions of UK citizens are being put at risk in a Brexit process which I believe to be unlawful.”

“The Prime Minister has been asked for months, through the Government Legal Department, to answer the four questions about whether an Article 50(1) decision has been taken or not and has failed to provide answers. If a decision had been taken the Government Legal Department would have provided answers without delay. The continuing absence of clear answers raises very serious doubts about the existence of an Article 50(1) decision. If there has been no decision then it follows that the negotiations between the United Kingdom and the European Union are unlawful.”

“The Prime Minister has deceived the citizens of the United Kingdom. It is time that this Brexit Madness was stopped.”

“I continue to hold the view that the Court should consider this matter urgently. I am considering whether I should lodge an application for an oral hearing to challenge Mr. Justice Supperstone’s Order of 7^th November, in which he declined to consider the Claim for Judicial Review as an Urgent Claim.”

Note to Editors:

In light of the death of Jo Cox MP and the threats to the life of Gina Miller, editors are asked not to publish the home address of Dr. Watt or other biographical details which would assist a malevolently minded person.

Editors are asked to refer to Dr. Watt as “a retired Scottish doctor”.

The Claim for Judicial Review has the Court Reference Number CO/5050/2017.

Dr. Watt’s Claim for Judicial Review has the short title R (Watt) v The Prime Minister and another.

The Prime Minister’s co-defendant is Donald Tusk, the President of the European Council.

Judicial Review is a multi-step process.

The first step is legal correspondence which complies with the Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review.

In compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review, Dr. Watt sent two Letters Before Claim, on 23^rd September 2017 and 25^th September 2017.

The Letter Before Claim of 23^rd September had a single Ground of Claim which was included in Dr. Watt’s Claim of 28^th October 2017.

The Letter Before Claim of 25^th September contained multiple Grounds of Claim of which a further three feature in the Claim of 28^th October before the Administrative Court.

Dr. Watt’s Claim dated 28^th October 2017 was sealed by the Administrative Court on 1^st November and was served on the Prime Minister’s legal representatives on 6^th November.

The Government Legal Department has indicated that it will lodge its initial written defences by 27^th November 2017.