A dive into deep constitutional waters: Article 50, the prerogative and parliament

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)


This article analyses the Article 50 TEU debate and the argument that for the UK Government to trigger the formal withdrawal process without explicit parliamentary authorisation would be unlawful, because it would inevitably result in the removal of rights enjoyed under EU law and the frustration of the purpose of the statutes giving those rights domestic effect. After a brief survey of Article 50, this article argues first of all that the power to trigger Article 50 remains within the prerogative, contesting Robert Craig's argument in this issue that it is now a statutory power. It then suggests a number of arguments as to why the frustration principle may be of only doubtful application in this case, and in doing so it re‐examines one of the key authorities prayed in aid of it ‐ the Fire Brigades Union case.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to) 1064-1089
Number of pages25
JournalModern Law Review
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - 21 Nov 2016

Bibliographical note

The acceptance date for this record is provisional and based upon the month of publication for the article.


Dive into the research topics of 'A dive into deep constitutional waters: Article 50, the prerogative and parliament'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this