Why the Dublin case matters.
Ultimately, it’s about leverage. The UK doesn’t have much of it, if at all. And soon, after Article 50 notification is sent, the UK will have to live on the European Union’s goodwill. So far, there’s very little.
Imagine it’s 2018, Theresa May finally gives Nicola Sturgeon the ability to call an Independence referendum and the polls trade leads between Yes and No. Imagine her face after being told so many unvarnished facts. No meaningful Single Market access, no associate customs union membership, and contractual defense. It’s now 2019, the UK is on an edge. Ruminating before a vote that could split it in half, trucks unable to go through the Irish border, and grinding to a halt thanks to a labor shortage. 2019, the day is here. The Labour benches are moribund. The SNP benches are filled with Salmond like swagger. The Liberal Democrats ready to campaign against anything that happens, and the Northern Irish parties making backroom deals with anybody who will listen. The Prime Minister will have to give parliament a vote on deal or no deal. Nobody wants to be in this situation. What if I told you, there was a small mechanism to avoid the mess?
Is Article 50 (unilaterally) revocable?
Depending on who you ask, you’ll either get a terse dismissal, an inquisitive non answer, or confusing equivocation. Nobody, not even the people who drafted it, can come up with a authoritative answer. That is why Jolyon Maugham’s case is so important. No matter the outcome, the case (if it makes it to the ECJ) will settle that question indefinitely.
The case is going to ask 2 questions: Is Article 50 unilaterally revocable? and Does leaving European Economic Area requires separate notification? If Maugham, and McGarr Solicitors, “win” their case; they give the UK some small but crucial leverage. If they “lose” then leaving really does mean leaving. Either way, questions are answered.
(Big If)
If the UK is able unilaterally revoke Article 50, it has leverage against the EU. The European Union does not want a friendly enemy at conferences. They don’t want to repeat talks or be stuck at limbo. Currently, the EU does not need to model this scenario because revocation is impossible without political will. If the ECJ rules in favor of Jolyon Maugham’s case, then it’s less about politics than it is a matter of law. If successful, the European Union holds 1 less card. 1 card is small, but it gives the UK side much more room for footwork. For europhiles, it means one good chance for staying in the European Free Trade Area. For eurosceptics, it means giving the UK much needed leverage to “play a blinder”. For Labour, it makes opposition easier. For Conservatives, it makes good headlines. Nobody should want Maugham to lose, because everybody (in the UK at least) wins.
What if Maugham loses?
Then the European Union still has all the cards. Nothing much changes, and the UK loses control over what it ought to have control over.
