Total Visits

Saturday, 30 March 2019

English Democrats bring the Case to get a Declaration that the UK has left the EU as of the 29th March 2019


This is our only chance to complete what we voted for in the EU Referendum!

We are serving the legal papers required to bring this case but we really need all the support that Leave supporters can give us to make sure that we can match the expensive legal muscle whom the Government and Remainers will instruct against us! 

Please help as generously as you can! 

There is a donate button on our website >>> EnglishDemocrats.Party

Here are the draft Grounds:-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

BETWEEN

THE QUEEN
ON THE APPLICATION OF THE ENGLISH DEMOCRATS
(REG. NO. 6132268)
Applicant

-and-

THE PRIME MINISTER (1)

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION (2)
Respondents



________________________________

GROUNDS OF THE APPLICATION
_________________________________


1.     It is submitted that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has left the European Union as of the 29th March 2019 after the expiry of its two year Notice to Leave dated 29th March 2017.

2.     Much of the relevant law has been explored and ruled upon by this Honourable Court and by the Court of Appeal and by the Supreme Court in the case of R (on the application of Miller and another) – v – Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC5.  Consequently Parliament enacted the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017. 

3.     The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland joined the European Union pursuant to Treaty in 1972 and subsequently the European Union Act 1972 was enacted to give domestic legal force to the Treaty obligations to the European Union.

4.     The current overarching constitution of the European Union was reformed under the Lisbon Treaty which was brought into direct legal force in the United Kingdom pursuant to the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008.

5.     Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty  reads as follows:-

“Article 50 – Treaty on European Union (TEU)

1.     Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2.     A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention.  In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union.  That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.  It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3.     The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4.     For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5.     If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asked to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.”
                           
6.     On the 23rd June 2016 the voters of the United Kingdom, by a majority, and the voters of England by a larger majority,  voted, in the largest democratic mandate in the United Kingdom’s history, to leave the European Union. 

7.     In accordance with the United Kingdom’s “Constitutional Requirements” Parliament enacted the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.  The Preamble to that Act states that it is:- “An Act to confer power on the Prime Minister to notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom’s intention to withdraw from the EU” 

The Act provides:-

“1. Power to notify withdrawal from the EU
(1)  The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom’s intention to withdraw from the EU.”

8.     Pursuant to the statutory power granted by the European Withdrawal Act 2017 the Prime Minister duly served the Notice on 29th March 2017.  That Notice expired on the 29th March 2019. 

9.     Accordingly it is submitted that as of the scintilla temporis after the expiry of the said notice on the 29th March 2019, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has left the European Union.

10. In the European Union Withdrawal Act 2018 Parliament further enacted a transitional scheme whereby it proposed to transpose all EU law into a direct effect in the UK jurisdictions of Northern Ireland, Scotland and England and Wales.  Much of that Act has not been brought into force.  The Act mis-describes its implementation date as “exit day”.  This is something of a misnomer since under the true construction of this Act it has no role, either purported or implicit, in determining the date of departure of the UK leaving the European Union.  Within the meaning of the Act, “exit date” is merely the implementation date for the Act’s transactional arrangements.

11. The Applicant is aware that there has been purported ministerial Regulation under the 2018 Act which may have been approved by resolution in both Houses.  However even if it has, it is submitted that such a Regulation cannot of itself be in any way definitive of the UK’s actual departure from the European Union.  The relevant wording of the Act makes this clear:- 

“European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018

An act to repeal the European Communities Act 1972 and make other provision in connection with the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU.

[26th June 2018]

1 Repeal of the European Communities Act 1972

The European Communities Act 1972 is repealed on exit day.

2 Saving for EU-derived domestic legislation

(1) EU-derived domestic legislation, as it has effect in domestic law immediately before exit day, continues to have effect in domestic law on and after exit day.

20 Interpretation

(1) In this Act—

“exit day” means 29 March 2019 at 11.00 p.m. (and see subsections (2) to (5));

(2) In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day.

(3) Subsection (4) applies if the day or time on or at which the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom in accordance with Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union is different from that specified in the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1).

(4) A Minister of the Crown may by regulations—

(a) amend the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1) to ensure that the day and time specified in the definition are the day and time that the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom, and

(b) amend subsection (2) in consequence of any such amendment.”

12. Despite the express wording of the European Union (Notification f Withdrawal) Act 2017, expressly only empowering the Prime Minister to give Notice to withdraw the United Kingdom from the EU, the Prime Minister has purported to request an extension of the Article 50 date for departure and subsequently purported to agree an extension to the date of departure. 

13. It is submitted, in accordance with long and high authority of legal precedents and also recently and comprehensively in R (on the application of Miller and another) – v – Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC5 that, statute fully displaces any residual prerogative powers. 

14. In the premises the only power that the Prime Minister had, as regards Article 50, was the service of the Notice withdrawing the United Kingdom from the EU and giving two years notice.  That power was functus officio on the 29th March 2017. Accordingly, her purported request for an extension of the date of departure and the Government’s purported agreement to such an extension is and was unlawful and is and was null and void.

15. In the premises the Applicant seeks a Declaration from this Honourable Court that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland left the European Union upon the expiry of the Article 50 Notice on the 29th March 2019.




Statement of Fact

I believe that the facts in these Grounds are true.



Signed …………………………………           Dated ……………………..
            Robin Charles William Tilbrook





191 comments:

  1. I really hope you can do this. The government has made a mockery of the democratic decision our country made by ignoring the will of the people. Best of luck to you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It will only happen if enough people support it by donating and sharing around social media. Robin needs help with court costs now

      Delete
    2. Laurence Cochrane1 April 2019 at 10:54

      Everybody please keep pushing this link all over the internet. More publicity the more funds available I have been sharing this link continuous on Facebook all WE Please Others on Twitter or the like 1)o likewise.

      Delete
    3. Too true and here is one that will. As much as I can afford

      Delete
    4. i hope and pray this comes to fruition as im afraid of what may happen if not

      Delete
    5. Nothing in the media, I found out by chance. I'm not sure you have much of a case but it must be tested. I was told the case began yesterday but can't find any reports at all.

      Delete
    6. Well done Sir. Some affirmative action on behalf of your nation. It is a wonderful thing to behold in the midst of all the current chaos.

      Delete
    7. You are our only hope on this earth I think. Thankyou for standing up for what is right ( in the spirit of St. George ! ) I will donate my widows mite.

      Delete
  2. my understanding is that the EU were NOT unanimous in fact there were at least 3 abstentions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Abstentions are not votes against. They are the absence of a vote. If all votes are 'for' then it's unanimous.

      Delete
    2. Unanimous means all votes cast in the same direction.
      If there are no opposing votes, but some abstain, the vote should be recorded "nem con" which is not what Lisbon Treaty Article 50.3 says.
      All relevant EU statements I recall refer to "the 27 remaining members"

      Delete
    3. My understanding is; The Art 50 extension request needed a vote of approval from all 27 states according to EU law. Only one veto would prevent approval. On the day four countries wete intending to veto, so the vote was never taken. This is why the debate overran into late evening. The fudge they decided on was for Tusk to offer May an extension informally on condition that the EU received a written agreement from the U.K. Gov. That’s where May and her advisors, in their haste, forgot about the Gina Miller Law and used Executive Powers, hence this case.

      Delete
    4. I read that Hungary wasn't allowed to vote, if that's true it couldn't be unanimous.

      Delete
  3. I think this Judge agrees with you http://tapnewswire.com/2019/03/judge-declares-brexit-delay-illegal/

    ReplyDelete
  4. True!..
    I sincerely hope this is passed by the Court that we have already left the EU!...:)..

    ReplyDelete
  5. All I know it was the law to leave on the 29 march 2019 and we did not ,,to me the law has been broken and yes I agree they should be accountable the law is the law

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope and pray you win and democracy will prevail although I doubt it.

      Delete
    2. I hope this is passed and those retched traitors in parliament can then be thrown out of office in a general election where we can dispose of them.

      Delete
    3. as long as the Labour traitors do not get in using postal votes from muslims - come on Nige

      Delete
  6. Good Luck and a fair wind to see it through the Courts.

    ReplyDelete
  7. We must do something about this lying and corrupt Government. I'm disgusted that they are being allowed to break the Law. I knew it wasn't legal and had wondered why no one did anything before. Why people like Mogg Boris or Owen never took action before?

    ReplyDelete
  8. If this is not a scam, I will gladly donate !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is not i have donated

      Delete
    2. I don't think it is...Bill cash posted a letter on Twitter that he sent to the PM stating these exact same facts. He also brought it up on Friday before the vote in the HoC. Check out Bill Cash's twitter or web page if he has one. He is chair of the European Scrutiny Committee I think.

      Delete
    3. I have donated, it's not a scam.

      Delete
  9. Another side to free speech, this will not be aired from state tv. Free speech is free speech no matter who you are. The balance has tipped too far over for our lives sakes. I hope this helps tip back to reality not fantasy. Cross party support or new parties will be next.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If laws can be dismissed so easily,what is the point of parliament

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's called the separation of powers. It keeps a curb on government excess. If we had a constitution like America it would happen a lot more here.

      Delete
  11. Has this paper now been submitted

    ReplyDelete
  12. Good luck, really hop you can do this.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Good luck, really hope you can do this.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I consider the UK to be out of the EU @ 29 march 2019.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Elizabeth Samways9 April 2019 at 01:39

      So do I. I really need to know what has happened, or when it will happen, in the Court. What is the update please?

      Delete
    2. The court respond as to progress of the case on 17th April next.

      Delete
  15. sorry i could only donate a pound, all i have left for groceries is a tenner until i get paid again

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bless You----read about the widow's Mite Mark 12:42

      Delete
  16. Hope your right....

    ReplyDelete
  17. We give yo the right to use the money allocated to the corrupt Clinton Foundation to use for this bill

    ReplyDelete
  18. Excellent and fully support this

    ReplyDelete
  19. Leave is what was promised and leave it should have been on March 29th 2019.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Good Luck Robin and your Counsel , all Leavers in the UK are behind you.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Good luck my friend, how do I donate

    ReplyDelete
  22. Well done Richard , you have made me proud to be British

    ReplyDelete
  23. Has the Prime Minister broken the law?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Where do i donate ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Donations can be made through the link at the top of this page.

      Delete
    2. On their website: https://www.englishdemocrats.party/donate

      Delete
  25. Where can I donate towards costs please. Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  26. Please send a "donate" link
    I will share it on my Facebook and Twitter page after donating myself

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can donate through the link at the top of this page (English Democrats Party) or use PayPal.me/englishdemocrats

      Delete
  27. Great work. Thank you. Good luck

    ReplyDelete
  28. I only earn minimum wage but where can I donate. Thank you for fighting for democracy.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I pray this attempt for justice is sucsessful

    ReplyDelete
  30. Typo in para 3. Should be ECA1972. Good luck

    ReplyDelete
  31. About time honesty won over tyranny

    ReplyDelete
  32. About time honesty won over tyrrany

    ReplyDelete
  33. About time honesty won over tyranny

    ReplyDelete
  34. About time democracy won over tyranny

    ReplyDelete
  35. Wishing you every success sir.

    ReplyDelete
  36. As far as I am concerned, we left and are now OUT...Horray ! I speak for the millions of those who do not voice themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Good luck we need to be out

    ReplyDelete
  38. Well done Richard and good luck.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Donated & joined, keep up the fight

    ReplyDelete
  40. Will the Queen take notice - of her own Law? http://www.sxolsout.org.uk/zreal1.html

    ReplyDelete
  41. Well done.we voted leave eu

    ReplyDelete
  42. The Law is The Law. As a believer in the rule of Law, I agree that our Country is now no longer a member of the European UNION, and must proceed as such. Good Luck with this legal challenge to the unfortunate situation our Government has created.

    ReplyDelete
  43. What’s the latest. Is everything submitted and good to go.

    ReplyDelete
  44. A breath of fresh air, and hope. Good luck ..we need you.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Good luck...praying for the right result

    ReplyDelete
  46. I don't think the extension of article 50 was put before the Queen therfore we should of left on the 29th of march

    ReplyDelete
  47. I'M NOT PAYING FOR WHAT I'M ENTITLED TO FOR NOTHING.

    ReplyDelete
  48. This is huge. Even if they pretend they haven't left it is legally recorded here.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Brittania no longer rules the waves ... She waives the rules !!

    ReplyDelete
  50. We should suggest that some of the £39million that will be saved be used to fund this deserving cause

    ReplyDelete
  51. we just want to get out the little things will be alright in the end

    ReplyDelete
  52. I wish you every success with this.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Hope you win your case best wishes WE WILL NEVER GIVE UP FOR FREEDOM

    ReplyDelete
  54. A.T. Culwick got there first in 1963 @anon but yes, it;s still true!

    typo:

    12. Despite the express wording of the European Union (Notification [o]f


    14. functus officio on ...

    a person can be functus officio but can a power be? meaning fully and finally discharged

    ReplyDelete
  55. Thank you for taking this matter up legally. It's unclear if the UK government has passed the amendment to 'update' the bill to the new date, but I would argue, even if they had, by retroactively changing the date, what was presented by the government originally is substantially different from what was presented in the amendment, effectively like a trojan horse bill, and demands an entirely separate bill.

    What MPs originally voted on was a fixed, stationary date of 29th March, and nowhere in the bill did it make allusions to an extension or possible extension. By introducing an amendment that changes the date - the key focal point of the bill (meaningless without the fixed date) - what the government have done (different from Parliament) is subvert and mislead MPs on the original intentions of the bill. MPs voted explicitly on a fixed date, not a moving date, and by changing the date, it undermines explicitly what they voted on.

    Imagine if an MP voted on a prison bill that said 'give a murderer a life sentence', and the government then put out an amendment to say 'give a murderer no punishment', the outcome is the crux of why the rest of the bill was voted on.

    Effectively, the government have gotten people to pass the Withdrawl Act 2017 by deceiving them into thinking March 29th was a fixed date (written down in law) and then by changing it at the last minute under pressure, undermining MPs democratic efforts by saying that date is no longer fixed. MPs voted on a fixed date, not a roving date.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Best of british luck to you

    ReplyDelete
  57. 29th March was the date chosen so we left then as far as I’m concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Get a petition going also with this point. If it goes viral they will have to take notice.

    ReplyDelete
  59. When does it go before a court?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Dear Robin

    The racketeer and gangster Al Capone avoided conviction for everything except Tax Evasion, but on a grand enough scale to see him put away for 11 years and, for that time, fined a massive amount too. And he died soon after being released from prison.

    There's often more than one way to skin a cat if you have the knowledge and lateral thinking ability to work it out.

    17.4 million people, and a few million more who've converted to the cause since 2016, are right behind you. All strength to your arm, Robin.

    Your knighthood awaits. (But you'll have a richly deserved donation from me today!)

    Kind regards

    Trevor Clark
    Twitter: @g2fOUT

    ReplyDelete
  61. Dear Robin

    The racketeer and gangster Al Capone avoided conviction for everything except Tax Evasion, but on a grand enough scale to see him put away for 11 years and, for that time, fined a massive amount too. And he died soon after being released from prison.

    There's often more than one way to skin a cat if you have the knowledge and lateral thinking ability to work it out.

    17.4 million people, and a few million more who've converted to the cause since 2016, are right behind you. All strength to your arm, Robin.

    Your knighthood awaits. (But you'll have a richly deserved donation from me today!)

    Kind regards

    Trevor Clark
    Twitter: @g2fOUT

    ReplyDelete
  62. Dear Robin

    The racketeer and gangster Al Capone avoided conviction for everything except Tax Evasion, but on a grand enough scale to see him put away for 11 years and, for that time, fined a massive amount too. And he died soon after being released from prison.

    There's often more than one way to skin a cat if you have the knowledge and lateral thinking ability to work it out.

    17.4 million people, and a few million more who've converted to the cause since 2016, are right behind you. All strength to your arm, Robin.

    Your knighthood awaits. (But you'll have a richly deserved donation from me today!)

    Kind regards

    Trevor Clark
    Twitter: @g2fOUT

    ReplyDelete
  63. Dear Robin

    The racketeer and gangster Al Capone avoided conviction for everything except Tax Evasion, but on a grand enough scale to see him put away for 11 years and, for that time, fined a massive amount too. And he died soon after being released from prison.

    There's often more than one way to skin a cat if you have the knowledge and lateral thinking ability to work it out.

    17.4 million people, and a few million more who've converted to the cause since 2016, are right behind you. All strength to your arm, Robin.

    Your knighthood awaits. (But you'll have a richly deserved donation from me today!)

    Kind regards

    Trevor Clark
    Twitter: @g2fOUT

    ReplyDelete
  64. This challenge is the most straightforward one available and stands a chance of succeeding [in theory at least]. It is a respectable argument based on the Gina Miller case.

    If you want to know more legal reasons to challenge what is happening some can be read here - but not as straightforward as Robin Tilbrook's case:

    https://tinyurl.com/y439q4ap

    EU Illegal Brexit Tactics – Invalidation of Brexit Withdrawal Treaty – Business Can Sue February 27, 2019 [Updated 16/3/2019]

    ReplyDelete
  65. Leading economists and even Mervyn King have confimred that we leave the EU. A clean break is best for the UK.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Go on guys you are doing a great democratic service to this country and should be heard immediately.

    ReplyDelete
  67. The government are lying and claiming otherwise, breaking their own laws. This is one of the smaller lies told about Brexit. Good luck with the case and I'll help any way I can. Brexit NOW! Brexit HARD!

    ReplyDelete
  68. Are the two leading political parties guilty of electoral fraud in not taking us out of the EU

    ReplyDelete
  69. A knighthood for sir robin! Hope so he deserves it.

    ReplyDelete
  70. What about this ? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2019/9780111184622

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Read the information, that’s covered.

      Delete
  71. Good Luck. i really hope this does it and we have left the EU. The majority of our government have gone rogue and it needs to be dealt with. so hears hoping.

    ReplyDelete
  72. All Brexiteers will donate at least a £ then that would cover the legal costs So lets get behind this so we can have our Democracy Restored

    ReplyDelete
  73. I have first-hand experience of just how corrupt the High Court and Court of Appeal are when it comes to fighting the corrupt government.
    The beauty of this case is its simplicity in citing Gina Miller. Even so, I expect the bent judges in the bent courts will side with the bent government. The courts just simply ignore what is plainly written in law in black and white when it doesn't suit their establishment chums.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that the High Court and Court of Appeal are thoroughly corrupt and that is the problem. Maybe Robin should start proceedings in a neutral Court so start proceedings in Russia.

      The English and Welsh legal system is skewed in favour of minorities, their interests and against the indigenous English and other white Britons.

      Brexit is the first but vitally important step to solving our problems.

      At this stage the EU is beginning to realise that the remainers here are a liability to them and are seriously going to cut their losses soon. The remainers know this and are getting worried.

      francis

      Delete
  74. Hope this works out, wonderful if we have left on the 29th. Parliament has ignored the people that voted for them. Time to clean up the rabble.

    ReplyDelete
  75. We need to leave the corrupt EU.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Hope this works the law is the law Bill Cash stood up in parlement & made the same points but was rebuffed even sneared at by remainers Jeffrey Cox must know so is he guilty.for miss leading parlement

    ReplyDelete
  77. Good luck the law is the law Jeffrey Cox must know if it's legal or not ?

    ReplyDelete
  78. We were never lawfully entered into the EU, so our EU membership was always null and void, the signed document signed by Ted Heath was signed and then locked in a safe for 30 years so that we would never know the truth until it was too late, that's the level of corruption we are dealing with, we were coerced into entering into the EU and the sovereign people were misled into believing we we entering into the EEC for trading purposes.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Robin, can you please give short daily updates? This allows us to continually post to social media and request support and donations...

    ReplyDelete
  80. Wishing you the best of luck, it’s about time, someone seen sense and got us out, what the hell is this government playing at, they are supposed to respect the referendum, as stated by all mps,at the start. Just because it did not go there way, OUT is for the best.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Thank you, thank you, thank you, I will support whatever way I can. Ill donate too now. I've written to every Eu PM and every party here and continue to do so. OUT we won the vote to get OUT.

    ReplyDelete
  82. What was the outcome of yesterday's hearing.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Leave means leave i hope we win

    ReplyDelete
  84. Have Donated and circulating Your Legal Claim trying to ensure others do as well.
    My limited understanding is that what the EU offered in the Article 50 Extension was not legally binding in International Law and therefore even if Parliament advocates that EU Law supersedes UK Law, the UK acceptance of any Extension by the EU must not only be Lawful in International Law but also in UK Law. And using the Miller Case [Gina] as a precedent [Parliament is Sovereign and the Government is not] then
    Parliament is the only conduit that is able make the request for any extension and must be done legally to stand.
    The acceptance letter by the Government [Tim Barrow] was not a Legal Instrument and therefore the statute in UK Law being the Legally binding departure date of 29/3/2019 for Article 50 has been ignored by both parties.
    I believe its well tested in International as well as UK Law that one can not break the rule of law to seek to gain or obtain enrichment by doing so.
    So long as the UK Judiciary is still independent and not politicised then given the Miller precedent then I struggle to see how your Claim is not upheld


    ReplyDelete
  85. has this case been filed in the courts yet

    ReplyDelete
  86. What is the timescale for the process? Would have thought it quite urgent?

    ReplyDelete
  87. Anyone have an idea of the timescale for the process? Rather urgent I would have thought?

    ReplyDelete
  88. Looks black and white to me,I see it as We are out right now..

    ReplyDelete
  89. Have just put £1,000 in the pot to get us out of this farce...Go get them before its too late Robin Tilbrook and all Democrats!!

    ReplyDelete
  90. Please keep us updated we need to prove these parliamentary nit twits that they can’t break the law. Leave left now get all these lying vermin out

    ReplyDelete
  91. I have been writing to the Daily Telegraph forweeks making clear my view the failure to leave the EU on 29 March is in breach of the law and constitution and can be challenged in the courts. A valid Act of Parliament can not be set aside by parliamentary motions, however many or civerse, (nor can the EU cancel a law of the British parliament, least of all one they confirmed and accepted when itwqs past. While we remain in the EU they can over-rule our legislation ifit contradicts theirs but far from it doing so they agreed the law themselves. Only another Act of Parliament can cancel an Act. Een a"Statutary Istrument, which the Queen has no knowledge of - we are a Constitutional Monarchy, the EU hasnot cancelled our constitution, although theirclawsarecinbreqch of it andcalwayschavecbeen. When it became too late for such an Act to be passed before 29 March I atarted writing. Did they publish? No. All those party to the illegal remaining in the EU on 29 March are guilty of revolution and in olden times could be hanged drawn and quartered. As it is there is still a law making these acts treasonable. This is te greatest treasonsinceGuy Fawkes. Once found out it did not end well for him. Incidentally I am heading for 95 nd wasin the Foreign Office German department when all the minutes of the Franco-German negotiations for the European Coal and Steel Community were betrayed to MI6 by an ex Maquisard bureaucrat in the Quai d'Orsay horrified by the secretcNai cdicilsto destroy Great Britain by secretly subsidising each of their heavy industries in turn (war potential) in order to destroy ours. It hastaken themc50 years but wehavecbeen forced out of the old sunset industriew more cheaply doneby developing countriew with low wages and into the sunrise high tech industries, whilst Germany has stayed in the sunset industries and sels mostly to other EU countries.
    When the prime Ministerc(Attlee) decided to do nothing about the minutes, saying countries afterdomination by dictatorships would beso pleased with democracythey woud confound the Franco Geman knavish tricks I resigned. I have recently been on Radio Freedom in California telling the USA this and on Google as "Witness to History"(25 inutes debating withEdward Spalton of Campaign for Independent Britain, CIB. Edward, a German speaker, has been to Berlin and copied the Nazi Constitution from the Nazi archive hiselfr nd ca ertify it is the same as theEU constitution, word for word.
    y memoir (600 age) wioo be published shortly. my chapter on my time in the F0 in 1950-1951 is chapter 10 11 pages. Requests for email copies to Hassocks@lineone.net will get a copy attached by return email (as long as there are not too many of them. John Walsingham

    ReplyDelete
  92. I am sure this article has touched all the internet users, its really really nice paragraph on building up new blog.
    I always spent my half an hour to read this weblog’s posts every day along with
    a mug of coffee. Everyone loves it whenever people get together and share thoughts.
    Great website, stick with it! http://tagomi.com/

    ReplyDelete
  93. Pas sure de recommander un jour sur ce site.

    ReplyDelete
  94. To those asking the Exit Fight begins-https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6879215/English-Democrats-begin-court-battle-prove-UK-left-EU.html

    ReplyDelete
  95. To those asking the Exit Fight begins-https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6879215/English-Democrats-begin-court-battle-prove-UK-left-EU.html

    ReplyDelete
  96. The High Courts will just delay and delay putting costs up and up and up. Pure chicanery.

    francis

    ReplyDelete
  97. we all have posted this to twitter BBC and just about all the media we can think of so why is nothing coming back, I have sent the link to all the papers mail/sun ETC: and still nothing.
    I think the papers are corrupt too. I have sent the link to BBC politics about 4 times now but as yet NO reply. we know why don't we. we urge you all to sent this link to @BBCPOLITICS the more they get may make them report about it or at least flood them out with it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Telegraph may assist as they have been somewhat supportive of Brexit, and aside from the Mail On-line its almost like MSM has a section D with regard to reporting on Robin's Case.

      Delete
    2. Try the Telegraph News desk, as aside from the Mail On-line its almost like a Section D reporting restriction is in place, but the
      truth is that most of MSM is controlled.

      Delete
  98. Thank you, Robin. You'll be a national hero if this succeeds!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Help him with a donation no matter how small

      Delete
  99. Rendez-vous à la boutique Outlet Démarque.

    ReplyDelete
  100. The Exit Fight Begins- https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6879215/English-Democrats-begin-court-battle-prove-UK-left-EU.html

    ReplyDelete
  101. Good luck i hope it works out do it for the british (people). This needs to be made more advetised,i only found out by somebody contacting me by personal means.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Article 50.3

    3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

    Article 50.4
    4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
    A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

    No mention of having to be ALL 27 members - just a qualified majority ��

    ReplyDelete
  103. Who drafted the Statutory Instrument extending the deadline to 12th April? Was it not drafted in haste and without proper ministerial authority? If so it has no standing and is therefore invalid.

    francis

    ReplyDelete
  104. I have donated, surely 17 million of us could help with a pound. It would be worth every penny just to have tried.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i donated a fiver well worth a shot we are being betrayed

      Delete
  105. Did Hitler support the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan? Or did he want to copy and modify it?

    francis

    ReplyDelete
  106. I really hope this can be done and that the case does win but,I feel there are to many power crazy people in the establishment that are hell bent on Britain remaining in the EU.The only problem now is wether we stay or go Britain is the laughing stock of Europe and around the world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brexit is not accidently happenew by coincidence. People may think different by me of course and I understand. But my opinion is clear that only one and true God is the God of Holy Bible and UK is Protestant country. EU elite are Jesuits trying to destroy by any way all Protestant countries. Present EU is Satanic modern style Tower of Babel. So BREXIT is gift of the True Almighty God to the UK Protestant country to become free from Satanic Popish EU of Jesuits. Then remember IF THE ALMIGHTY GOD IS ON MY SIDE THIS COURT CASE BE SUCCESSFUL AND NOBODY WILL BE ABLE TO STAND AGAINST IT TO WIN. I am supporting this Court case and I am Brexiter I BELIEVE 100% THAT THE ALMIGHTY GOD OF KJV HOLY BIBLE IS ON OUR SITE NOT ON SIDE OF PERVERTED GLOBALISTS MODERN ROMAN EMPIRE.

      Delete
  107. i too thought this extension was unlawful and wondered whether it could be fought in the courts,it would be interesting to find out.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Well, I'm sure I don't understand the legal ramifications of this but anything that gets us out of the EU is good in my book.
    I've chipped in my £25.00 and hope this outrageous insult to democracy can be rectified, and we can finally Leave !

    ReplyDelete
  109. Well, I'm sure I don't understand the legal ramifications of this but anything that gets us out of the EU is good in my book.
    I've chipped in my £25.00 and hope this outrageous insult to democracy can be rectified, and we can finally Leave !

    ReplyDelete
  110. It seems to me that throughout history things have to be well and truly broken for change to occur. So here we are with the " good men" doing something!! Great Britain IS broken. May our donations however small help to fix it. Good on ya!!!

    ReplyDelete
  111. It seems to me that throughout history things have to be well and truly broken for change to occur. So here we are with the " good men" doing something!! Great Britain IS broken. May our donations however small help to fix it. Good on ya!!!

    ReplyDelete
  112. Found this website when I was starting research for lodging a similar claim. Great to hear that there is already such a well thought out campaign. Can I just point out that Article 50 makes a clear distinction at point 4 between 'the council member representing the withdrawing state' and 'the withdrawing member state' as such Teresa May (who is the former) cannot act in fulfilment of any part of article 50 as if she were the latter. As such if you read point of article 50 you will see that agreement to any extension has to be by unanimous consensus between the council members (other than that of the withdrawing member state - as specified by point 4) AND the Withdrawing Member State. Therefore by virtue of the fact that TM is not the WMS and the fact that the Gina Miller case proved that government cannot act on behalf of the WMS in regard to point 2 without an act of parliament empowering government to do so, it would have required both the unanimous agreement of the European Council (which they had) AND an Act of UK Parliament empowering the government to seek and accept an extension to Article 50 (which they did not have) for an extension to be legally compliant with Article 50. As such I think it is clear that the European Council erred in believing that they had extended Article 50 just because the UK government(TM) agreed. As such Gina Miller has very successfully already very kindly proved that Brexit with No Deal has already happened. In regard to concerns about the government dragging this out and ramping up the costs - can I suggest that you look at representing yourself - that negates any threat of escalating legal costs and it is quite easy to do - I have done exactly that twice over the last 2 years and won both cases against the establishment (once when all legal advice claimed the case was unwinnable - even with legal representation). Would be happy to support and advise or to join as a parallel unrepresented litigant myself. Ian

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think your synopsis and the way the Claim has been framed are right on the money and in a fair and just world this claim would be upheld and out.
      However, while I am a supporter and have donated, I have serious reservations that this will be played out on a fair and level; basis in that the Judiciary has been corrupted and is clearly politicised, even more so on such claims, and secondly I maybe wrong but I understand from very limited knowledge that this Claim is a ''Judicial Review'' application, and therefore its very restricted within the Frame works as to where it can actually go. Such applications are always very narrow and there is not much scope to expand.
      The other concern is ''International Law'' which did not figure in the Miller case but hopefully based on the facts and justice prevailing then we are Out as 29/03/2019.

      Delete
  113. The day after the EU vote for the extension a message appeared on Facebook from the Hungarian president/Prime minister which disappeared very quickly. He was apologising for letting us down and stated that he was going to vote against the extension but he was stopped from voting. I got the impression that he was falsed to not to vote. Were we ever informed whether or not all 27 EU members voted for the extension. I have read that there were 2 other EU members that were stopped from voting against. Does anyone have any prove of this because this would also be unlawful. It only passes if all 27 countries vote to agree the extension..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I post regularly on Breitbart. There is another regular and reliable poster there who claims to be a personal friend of Matteo Salvini. He was adamant that Italy would vote against the extension. It seems me likely that there was no vote within the normal meaning of the word vote.

      Delete
  114. There was a message on Facebook the next day which disappeared very quickly from the prime minister of Hungary apologising for letting us down over the extension on 29th March. He said he was giing to vote no to the extension but he was stopped from voting by the others (I was under the impression falsfully. I also read from a site that a couple of others were stopped from voting against the extension. If so this means that not all EU members voted, which is not allowed. Does anyone else know about or read about this, please let us know on here.

    ReplyDelete
  115. There was a message on Facebook the next day which disappeared very quickly from the prime minister of Hungary apologising for letting us down over the extension on 29th March. He said he was giing to vote no to the extension but he was stopped from voting by the others (I was under the impression falsfully. I also read from a site that a couple of others were stopped from voting against the extension. If so this means that not all EU members voted, which is not allowed. Does anyone else know about or read about this, please let us know on here.

    ReplyDelete
  116. I think all the mp`s are corrupt and the BBC because if this was true why is this not world wide news, The BBC know about it , I and thousand more have sent info and links to the BBC but are ignoring it ? because the BBC are REMAIN, we have only got 2 papers that put a small piece in there column mail/express, I have sent links to France and to the president surprise surprise NO feed back. What ells can we do
    we have no means of telling ALL the UK all about this only on social media but not all read Facebook/twitter or other sites
    and time is running out, but what if we do remain and then we do find out this was unlawful WILL it be NULL AND VOID and we come out or will the EU say sorry you cannot now

    ReplyDelete
  117. Since the 1970s occupation of the Uk formed settlements for devolution and 2 years ago two sides went to war on Brexit, numerous MPs, including Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales escalated the need to LEAVE.. Under internatiinal law those REMAINERS after the 29th March 2019 occupation in the BREXIT debate is illegal, and, since Article 50 adopted an approach for the public on that date it must have confirmed that a singular chosen settlement rather than chaos of multiply settlements created boarders. VOTE LEAVE, let's do it asap and go forward in the principle of a two staged exit. GO NOW and let's the public rather than MP and BBC speak. If the LEAVE settlement wants to help REMAIN it can do at a later stage. But for now under international law  REMAINERS have have no legal validity and pose a serious shame on the UK. If this shame happens then Article 50 must be illegal - begs the question - YOU DONT NEED A DEAL IF IT IS NOT NEEDED - I support this case.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Since the 1970s occupation of the Uk formed settlements  Devolution happened and 2 years ago two sides went to war on Brexit, numerous MPs, including Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales escalated the need to LEAVE for the accepted the romantic notion of one step away from EU and never to be them but accept them.



    Under internatiinal law those REMAINERS after the 29th March 2019 occupation of UK mainland in the BREXIT debate is illegal. The policy maker who created Article 50 adopted the  approach for the public in one settlement on that date must leave. No other dates mentioned. That a singular chosen settlement called LEAVE rather than chaos of multiply settlements avoided creating unecessary boarders. So. VOTE LEAVE, let's do it asap and go forward in the principle of a two staged exit save money and finish it in 2 years.





    GO NOW and let's the public rather than MP and BBC speak after all the Labour Party remain campus is embarrassing so much so it makes BBC reporting Laura Kuenssberg annoying.



    If the LEAVE settlement wants to help REMAIN it can do at a later stage. But for now under international law  REMAINERS have have no legal validity and pose a serious shame on the UK. If this shame happens then Article 50 must be illegal - begs the question how Labour Party is so politically poor and weak - YOU DONT NEED A DEAL IF IT IS NOT NEEDED.



    I support this case. I voted labour but doubt that I will do in the future. No party is worth my vote.The second stage can be done in June 2022 when we all vote and EU will no doubt keep in touch offshore whilst they amend the Article 50 and other clauses.

    ReplyDelete
  119. How deliciously ironic that you cite the Miller case in support of your argument.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes it is indeed but what is sauce for the Remain goose is sauce for the Brexit gander.

      Francis

      Delete
  120. Nothing on the BBC,Sky news but it seems the only channels that show it are the foreign channels.It also appears that next week several EU countries have to sell bonds to prop them up,Germany,France,SPain,Portugal,Italy. This is why they intend to keep us in the EU Just for our money.They will allow us to stay for the EU elections .Then they will change Article50 and we will be in for the next 5years.because TMay is a tratTr along with most of the MPs.Youhave only got to look at the South Wales elections results and see that UKIP quadrupled there votes.The Brexit Parties have 17% of the 35/45 million voters in the next GE so looking at it the cons and Lie.bor party are going to lose 6million votes amongst them.add that to the 17.4 million and out of the 620Ps now sitting ,only around 200 will be back.Please support all Brexit Parties by donating to theBrexit Party and English Democrats.Lets show them the Bulldog Spirit if the UK people

    ReplyDelete
  121. Go on to the Government Website to number 10 Downing Street and ask them why they have not replied to the Court Order by The English Democrats. I have done and asked why there is nothing on the News about it ? Let's block the website ,make sure the Referendum which they stated was once in a lifetime and the result would be accepted

    ReplyDelete
  122. Go on to the Government Website to number 10 Downing Street and ask them why they have not replied to the Court Order by The English Democrats. I have done and asked why there is nothing on the News about it ? Let's block the website ,make sure the Referendum which they stated was once in a lifetime and the result would be accepted

    ReplyDelete
  123. Thank you for your e-mail. We expect to be able to reply within three working days. For more complex or specific queries, responses may take longer.

    Your case number is 101000445031

    Your registered enquiry to the Europe Direct Contact Centre is as follows:

    If you read the full document that was sent to the PM Mrs May that on the 29th March we left the EU and that any more negotiations with Brexit or any extensions will be NIL and VOID >>>>
    https://twitter.com/RobinTilbrook?fbclid=IwAR3S60lIkeDpDEiVqPd9THiEJTgZrQRM9ovErObQZ8mUCrk3j9bMFCRPQ5w

    Please read this>>>>
    https://robintilbrook.blogspot.com/2019/03/english-democrats-bring-case-to-get.html

    please can you look at this as I do not know if you know about what is going on back in the UK.

    Please reply back if you can and let us know your findings.

    Kind Regards

    Gary


    If there are any errors or omissions in this confirmation, please write to us via https://europa.eu/european-union/contact/write-to-us_en or call us at 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11. You cannot use the "reply" function for this email.

    With kind regards,

    Europe Direct Contact Centre

    ReplyDelete
  124. That just about does it now the EU are going to tell Maybot that We must not let a Brexit suppting MP be Prime Minister .Why does she and our Government let the EU make these demands on a Sovereign Country .This is just a taste of the future if we stay.Time for another GE .

    ReplyDelete
  125. Robin, please provide regular updates so that we can keep generating fresh details to post on social media and request donations, support and wider sharing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Until the High Court gives a Listing date for the actual Hearing, stating the Court chambers, date and time etc, then there is not really much updating.
      What is important is to inform and ask as many as possible to support and if they are able to Donate, as if the Application for the Judicial Review is for whatever reason denied, then there is only 7 days for which to Lodge and File the Appeal and costs will again be high.
      On the face of the Judicial Challenge and its points of law this should not arise, but given that there is more of a suspicion as to if the Judiciary is totally independent then having continuing support for ongoing costs any Appeal helps tremendously for which all supporters are grateful.

      Delete
  126. Hi Robin and thank you for your efforts so far. Is there a time limit on receiving a response from the Government?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Usually 7 days for an Application.

      Francis

      Delete
  127. Latest on twitter: The Government's Legal Department have confirmed that they will respond to our JR case (that the UK has left the EU on the 29.3.19) before the 17th April.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can we not see their response ?

      Delete
  128. Thank you for your efforts Robin and good luck for all of us

    ReplyDelete
  129. May has purposefully misled Parliament and the country and materially misdescribed the effect of the WA as delivering Brexit.
    She is just another facet of the biologically-driven hate evidenced here:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43a7yS0zhWc

    ReplyDelete
  130. Nicely put, Τhank you.

    ReplyDelete
  131. WE shall overcome Robin - thank you for having the the guts to bring this to court. 17.4 million should be donating to bring this about. You have my contribution.

    ReplyDelete
  132. thank you for giving me hope I am praying that you are successful.

    ReplyDelete
  133. so that remoaner miller has done us favour,of well come back to bite her arse

    ReplyDelete
  134. Robin, Is Bill Cash supporting your case, at least he seems to be on a parallel track? I am wondering why it's taking the Government so long to reply. I hope they are worried. Best

    ReplyDelete
  135. This is the way forward. Farage is sopping up the discontent and harnessing it with a stall tactic. Someday, someday. No, leave means leave NOW.

    ReplyDelete
  136. There are those who say it is a waste of time bringing a case because the judges have been politicised....we shall see. To do nothing is foolish. Of course we must challenge. This is the most awful situation we have been in as a country for many long decades.

    ReplyDelete
  137. I have only just learned of the current court case, as I was led to believe that Sir Bill Cash was taking it to court. Congratulations to Robin, you have my support and 25 English pounds ( not euros ). Any further updates?

    ReplyDelete
  138. I am interested to know what would happen if a Leaver is next PM and refuses to defend against your case!

    ReplyDelete