Brexit View

[TE44]

The link I attached was refering to it being upheld in the context of leases albeit in a small lease of days.My mistake. Will the transcript of the court case be public, does anyone know.

[robbin]

Yes

[TE44]

Thanks robbin, I can't see how EMA could continue without preparing for the changes and uncertainty of a no deal. The case above Sidhue has mentioned

Seems similiar to what is happening with Peckham Rye business at this moment. It was mentioned it was down to the renter to insure themselves.

Wouldn't an organisation like EMA be insured?

The thing about law is it often loses connection with everyday people in huge cases like this. There seems to be no room to individually look at circumstances, where the outcome seems to be dettered by who is representing you.

[JohnL]

TE44 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thanks robbin, I can't see how EMA could continue

> without preparing for the changes and uncertainty

> of a no deal. The case above Sidhue has mentioned

> Seems similiar to what is happening with Peckham

> Rye business at this moment. It was mentioned it

> was down to the renter to insure themselves.

> Wouldn't an organisation like EMA be insured?

> The thing about law is it often loses connection

> with everyday people in huge cases like this.

> There seems to be no room to individually look at

> circumstances, where the outcome seems to be

> dettered by who is representing you.

Some references in here

https://culs.org.uk/per-incuriam/articles/not-your-typical-brexit-article-brexit-and-contracts/

Would the EU actually pay up in a no deal (if we didn't pay up our ?39B)- why should they ?

[JohnL]

Father of the House Ken Clarke: "This is an almost unique political crisis. The public at the moment are looking upon our political system with something near to contempt. In the last month or two I have listened to what I - as a fairly experienced member here now - consider extraordinary nonsense about sweeping away centuries of tradition and destroying our procedures."

He gets it at least.

[JohnL]

"I thank the gentleman for his intervention and his brief declaration of his leadership intentions"

Corbyn just landed one on Gove (revenge for last week).

[TE44]

Thanks Johnl, its interesting and brings up more

questions on where the evidence,how people were thinking in 2011, which polls etc. I suppose it will come down to which evidence is produced to prove there is frustration. Who actually owns the buildin in Canary Wharf..

[TE44]

Canary Wharf Group plc

https://group.canarywharf.com/media/press-releases/canary-wharf-group-signs-with-ey-for-207000-sq-ft-of-office-space-at-25-churchill-place/

[TE44]

Aw well we've always got the growth hormone fed beef to look forward to and all the other goodies lined up for us. Its almost like some bad joke from the media, scare tactics have become the norm its impossible to draw a line on real possibilities from information given at times.Old laws that sound so factual and precise but need to be represented by experts and a system that will cost how much? Maybe a good idea for a public jury on that one.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47036119

[Alan Medic]

Where we are now as opposed to two weeks ago.....

*May opens the exit door* "Can you see the unicorn?" *the answer overwhelmingly* "Nooooooo"

*May closes the door and Brady says* "Can you imagine a Unicorn?" *the answer mostly* "Oh yes, I can see it"

There ends my life as a political correspondent.

[rendelharris]

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Where we are now as opposed to two weeks ago.....

>

> *May opens the exit door* "Can you see the

> unicorn?" *the answer overwhelmingly* "Nooooooo"

>

> *May closes the door and Brady says* "Can you

> imagine a Unicorn?" *the answer mostly* "Oh yes,

> I can see it"

>

> There ends my life as a political correspondent.

Brilliant, pinching!

[JohnL]

well I tried not to have a twitter meltdown :)

But beginning to agree with lots of leavers - sack all of them and replace - it's just the method.

[robbin]

TE44 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thanks robbin, I can't see how EMA could continue

> without preparing for the changes and uncertainty

> of a no deal. The case above Sidhue has mentioned

> Seems similiar to what is happening with Peckham

> Rye business at this moment. It was mentioned it

> was down to the renter to insure themselves.

> Wouldn't an organisation like EMA be insured?

> The thing about law is it often loses connection

> with everyday people in huge cases like this.

> There seems to be no room to individually look at

> circumstances, where the outcome seems to be

> dettered by who is representing you.

Not sure I understand what you are saying in your last two sentences. As for insurance, I don't see that it is particularly relevant to whether or not a contract or a lease is frustrated.

EMA are taking a punt, given their silly decision to enter into a long and expensive lease with no break clause. They will most likely end up being told they have to perform the contract they freely entered into (which no doubt was entered into with the benefit of legal advice). Then again, I do not know all the relevant facts so can't say for sure. I know what the law is though and EMA's starting point (on the authorities) is not a good one.

[keano77]

Jean Claude Juncker, talking about the backstop, said:

?...Ireland?s border is Europe?s border...?

Potential can of worms there surely. Since when has the EU been a transnational state?

[JohnL]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jean Claude Juncker, talking about the backstop,

> said:

>

> ?...Ireland?s border is Europe?s border...?

>

> Potential can of worms there surely. Since when

> has the EU been a transnational state?

Customs Union ? But there are many other supranational agreements the EU make - so I'd say it does have a border.

[robbin]

Treaty commitment to an 'ever closer union', protectionism against non-EU states, pushing for complete membership of a single currency (Eurozone) and for an EU army...

Whether you agree with it or not, isn't being a transnational state ('the United States of Europe') what the EU is all about now? The pre-EU days of the EEC single market are long gone.

The irony that it will be the EU which imposes a 'hard' border between NI and Eire appears lost on Juncker, Varadkar & co. The EU doesn't care about Ireland - they are a useful pawn in their negotiating strategy. You can pretty much guarantee that if the Irish government fell out of line, the EU would turn on them in an instant in an attempt to try to maintain the backstop con that TM got suckered into.

[JohnL]

Yes - it is ever closer union (well was). Didn't a Dane say :

"There are two kinds of European nations. There are small nations and there are countries that have not yet realized they are small nations."

[keano77]

I suspect Juncker meant Ireland?s border marks a border within which The EU treaties operate.

The EU is an organisation of member states, not a state in itself. Note the recent demotion of its diplomats by Trumps? team much to the EU?s displeasure

[JohnL]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I suspect Juncker meant Ireland?s border marks a

> border within which The EU treaties operate.

>

> The EU is an organisation of member states, not a

> state in itself. Note the recent demotion of its

> diplomats by Trumps? team much to the EU?s

> displeasure

I see it as transfer of sovereignty. We gave/loaned some to the EU - so the EU itself does have some sovereignty.

I see France's permanent UN Security Council seat moving to the EU one day (sorry French Nationalists).

[robbin]

I can see the French being the next to leave the EU. This time last year certainly it appeared that they would have voted to leave had they been given a referendum.

If Macron continues to be so woefully bad at running his country as he has been, there might be an even bigger swing to the right or to a populist candidate that would ultimately lead to a referendum there.

At least they might get to keep their UN veto, I suppose!

[JohnL]

Looks like Theresa Mays done the dirty on the ERG again.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/30/theresa-may-under-pressure-to-revamp-brexit-negotiating-team?CMP=share_btn_tw

No one ever learns.

[TE44]

robbin Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TE44 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Thanks robbin, I can't see how EMA could

> continue

> > without preparing for the changes and

> uncertainty

> > of a no deal. The case above Sidhue has

> mentioned

> > Seems similiar to what is happening with

> Peckham

> > Rye business at this moment. It was mentioned

> it

> > was down to the renter to insure themselves.

> > Wouldn't an organisation like EMA be insured?

> > The thing about law is it often loses

> connection

> > with everyday people in huge cases like this.

> > There seems to be no room to individually look

> at

> > circumstances, where the outcome seems to be

> > dettered by who is representing you.

>

>

> Not sure I understand what you are saying in your

> last two sentences. As for insurance, I don't see

> that it is particularly relevant to whether or not

> a contract or a lease is frustrated.

> EMA are taking a punt, given their silly decision

> to enter into a long and expensive lease with no

> break clause. They will most likely end up being

> told they have to perform the contract they freely

> entered into (which no doubt was entered into with

> the benefit of legal advice). Then again, I do

> not know all the relevant facts so can't say for

> sure. I know what the law is though and EMA's

> starting point (on the authorities) is not a good

> one.

In the case Sidhue referred to it seemed to be i

saying it was down to the leaseholder to insure

against situations involving a third party.

NCL contended the legal estate in land had passed to Panalpina and, therefore, the risks and benefits of the land had passed with it. Panalpina could protect themselves from risk by purchasing insurance. To apply the doctrine of frustration to leases would prejudice third party interests and, even if frustration were to apply to leases, it should only apply where there is complete destruction of the land itself.

"NCL contended the legal estate in land had passed to Panalpina and, therefore, the risks and benefits of the land had passed with it. Panalpina could protect themselves from risk by purchasing insurance. To apply the doctrine of frustration to leases would prejudice third party interests and, even if frustration were to apply to leases, it should only apply where there is complete destruction of the land itself."

I was trying to say if the law is clear and each side is put accross, it seems it will always come down to the legality of the situation which makes the opinion at the time seem worthless. If frustration is the only point of law this can be challenged on it will be interesting to see how indivual positions will make an impact on the result.

[JohnL]

?What we were thinking"

EU comes up with it's no deal plan (and I'm not trying to wind up leavers)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/no-deal-brexit-uk-eu-payments-deal-talks-european-commission-a8754226.html

[robbin]

John - I'm not really following your point. Is it that the UK will have to keep paying into the EU in a no deal scenario? If so, the reality is set out in the article:

"Officials admit they cannot force the UK to make any payments once it has left the bloc, though they hope Britain will take up the offer."

Or was your point something different?

[JohnL]

robbin Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> John - I'm not really following your point. Is it

> that the UK will have to keep paying into the EU

> in a no deal scenario? If so, the reality is set

> out in the article:

> "Officials admit they cannot force the UK to make

> any payments once it has left the bloc, though

> they hope Britain will take up the offer."

>

> Or was your point something different?

They can't force UK to continue paying but it just seemed funny even to a remainer like me - dodgy builder: the plan is you just keep paying us mate - we'll do the job later.