'...it is a good time to take stock of the Gibraltar strand of Brexit and how that intertwines with the Brexit saga and, ultimately, to the extent that it does represent a certain kind of completion, a good time to take stock of Brexit itself.'

The Conservatives 2015 manifesto promised ‘votes for life’ for all Britons living abroad – in line with other major democracies, such as the USA, France, Italy, and Canada.

At the moment you might be wondering what is happening to your favourite meat/fish/dairy products from the Nordics. Why is it out of stock? / Yes, it’s Brexit. Again. You may have assumed that this was all so very 2018, but no, rules are still changing and causing issues for the end consumers (that’s you).

The vision of post-Brexit Britain was one of international trade deals that would propel the country into a new era of prosperity. That vision of “Global Britain” is now dead. Thomas Sampson argues that the only viable alternative is a closer trade relationship with the EU.

Former Conservatives Prime Minister, Sir John Major, did not mince his words about Brexit at a Westminster committee meeting. / Speaking in February 2023, he asserted that leaving the European Union has been “a colossal mistake.”

Seven months after the advisory-only EU referendum, 114 brave MPs passionately spoke and voted AGAINST triggering Brexit. / Chris Bryant, Labour MP for the Rhondda, was one of them.

From 31 January to 1 February 2017, MPs debated the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill on whether to trigger Brexit – the Article 50 notice. / Ken Clarke was one of the 114 MPs. He was the ONLY Tory MP to vote against triggering Brexit.

Two recent UK Constitutional Law Association blogs (see here and here) have highlighted the importance of rights in the context of the UK’s referendum on EU membership, and indeed within EU law more generally.

Before Brexit, there were the Metric Martyrs. / The key legal case here was a set of appeals which were decided by the High Court in 2002, in a judgment now known as Thoburn.

It’s tempting to ignore the government’s announcement, made in the doldrums between Christmas and the New Year, that it is to become legal to sell wine and champagne in pint bottles.

'...my self-imposed task of documenting the Brexit impact has become a challenge not so much because of the difficultly of weighing up the positives and the negatives, but rather due to the sheer amount of damage Brexit is doing up and down the country, left, right and centre, and across sectors.'

Ever since the outcome of the Brexit referendum in June 2016, it seems like the UK constitution has lurched from crisis to crisis.

Following the recent Spanish elections, Andrew Canessa shines a light on the problematic nature of Gibraltar’s border with Spain, and the protracted efforts to resolve the issue.

I said that I would break the ‘summer recess’ of this blog if a Brexit event of sufficient interest or importance occurred and it has, with the government’s announcement today of an “indefinite extension to the use of CE [Conformité Européenne] marking for British businesses”.

Britain is now an anti-Brexit country. The polls confirm this; but it is also true in a politically more telling sense. The change in the national mood has not required anyone to change sides. The power of remorseless demographics has been enough to do the job on its own.

After the EU referendum, suspicions grew about the role of Russia in clinching the narrow ‘win’ for Brexit.

So, here’s THE key question: Who made the decision for the UK to leave the EU? It wasn’t the referendum. The referendum, as agreed by Parliament, was advisory only and not legally capable of making any decision. This was confirmed by the Supreme Court, who also ruled that the decision to leave the EU had to be taken by Parliament.

I have started reading the Brexit literature again. A recent paper – ‘What impact is Brexit having on the UK economy?’ by Graham Gudgin, Julian Jessop and Harry Western (GJW) from October 2022 argues there is no hard evidence of harm and that studies that claim to find harm are biased and/or incompetent! In this blog, I consider a few of their points in four areas.

This article examines the relationship between zero-rating and net neutrality in light of the latest case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, namely the Vodafone case (Case C-854/19). The aim is to determine whether the UK should follow the EU’s example in banning zero-rating practices as seen in Vodafone.

The CBI has recently called for a new trade deal with the European Union and Rishi Sunak saw himself forced to rule out the Swiss option. These are just examples of how little the UK understands how the European Union and the single market work. Nicholas Sowels lists many of the erroneous assumptions Britain has made ... ignoring that the four freedoms of movement ... are not just abstractions.