Re: &#@%!?

There is a very simple way to solve legal matters. Put it to the magistrate. In this case the ECJ.

Re: &#@%!?

Hi

Spot on JBR.

However I blame our useless Politicians for not stopping it happening.

Re: &#@%!?

Above invented story?

https://thecritic.co.uk/the-imperial...a%20Convention.

Re: &#@%!?

Hi

Nope, the Withdrawal Agreement will not be decided upon by the ECJ.

Re: &#@%!?

In the WA (and specifically in the ireland protocol) a mechanism is included for dispute settlement. For interpretation of the WA there is a joint committee, with shared chairing by michael gove and sefcovic. In case the committee doesn't reach agreement, then they can ask for arbitration. Each party appoints two representatives that will come to an advice for settlement. If the committee doesn't accept the outcome of arbitration, they refer to the ECJ.

The deal with canada has a similar set up for dispute settlement.

Re: &#@%!?

Re: &#@%!?

A lengthy story about germany, leading to the conclusion that in any EUUK trade deal the ECJ should not be the final legal station to decide on disputes.
A quick look at this site would have given the article's author some relevant insight: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/the-court-of-justice/

Re: &#@%!?

Well, it has led to a hardening of EU leader's positions.

French President Emmanuel Macron and other EU leaders will insist on tough enforcement rules for any trade deal with Britain, warning that Prime Minister Boris Johnson's bid to override the Brexit treaty has shown Britain's word cannot be trusted, the Financial Times reported.

EU diplomats said leaders at a summit starting on Thursday would call on EU chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier to ensure that "level playing field" guarantees for European businesses competing with British companies are backed by the right for Brussels to take rapid retaliatory action if Britain breaches its commitments, the FT reported on Monday.*
https://uk.mobile.reuters.com/articl...mpression=true

Re: &#@%!?

Hi

I appreciate that and I think it was a totally stupid thing for Boris to do.

However he was not stupid enough to agree to the ECJ having Jurisdiction.

What you must understand is this.

The UK leaving is down to the EU being stupid.

When it comes to people like me who were in favour of us staying in as a general principle deciding to vote leave, the EU has lost the argument.

Leaving will cost me, no lodgers, no unlimited cheap imports.

I and others have taken the decision to leave and accepted it will cost.

This is a simple matter of principle.

We will not be dictated to.

Re: &#@%!?

I have copied the relevant texts from both the WA and ireland protocol before. Boris signed up to both, including the role of the ECJ in both.
Boris and others like duncan smith not being able to read is a sign of the times to come.