|
|
In an interview with the Financial Times, Koen Lenaerts, Europe’s most senior judge, said that issues such as the treatment of Article 50, the legal path for a country to leave the bloc, “can be interpreted by our court like any other provision of union law”.
Mr Lenaerts declined to comment on the specifics of Brexit but warned that there were myriad unforeseen legal consequences of sovereign exit from the union that the EU’s top court may be called on to resolve. “I can’t even start intellectually beginning, imagining how and where and from which angle it might come,” said Mr Lenaerts.
Questions of EU law can ultimately only be settled in Luxembourg, meaning that the European Court of Justice — held up by Brexiters as an apotheosis of EU interference — may be a decisive voice in disputes over the process, content and implementation of exit terms.
Most notably, its opinion could be sought on whether Article 50 is revocable after a formal notification, a question that could be crucial for the political handling of Brexit in Westminster and Brussels. If a notification can be reversed, this will provide the British government with a means of changing course — albeit at a heavy political price — during the two years of negotiations.
The court’s jurisdiction would also stretch to the content of any exit deal and its implications for rights of citizens, companies and institutions under the treaties. [...]
Some senior EU officials argue that the UK remains bound by specific commitments made as a member, even after it has left the union and the treaties themselves cease to apply. This could leave Britain facing years of litigation in Luxembourg. [...]
Full article on Financial Times (subscription required)