| Quote: | |  | |
| AFAIK the ruling covered the UK's authority to withdraw the Article 50 notice unilaterally which is now clear and not disputed.
However, also AFAIK (and I just read a summary of the ruling not the ruling itself), it didn't address and wasn't asked to address a bad faith withdrawal - i.e. withdrawal followed by a new 2 year notice a day or 2 later. I read legal opinion (not a ruling) before the judgement suggesting the withdrawal would likely be declared invalid. But until a ruling actually happens (again I do not believe this has been the case but please correct if I'm wrong) no-one knows. Probably depends on the interval between the two events. | |
| | |
That was part of the Commission’s original reason for opposing it. I don’t think that anything can be done to prevent the U.K. rejoining. But their voting rights could be suspended if they did not act in good faith.