Brexit means brexit

[Eric Cartman]

I thought you would have known the legal status of article 50 Eric, most disappointed.

If there is a NO DEAL outcome - and the time duration is up - then in purely legal terms - we owe nothing BUT that would also mean we would have walked away - so there would be no deal on other things as well.

There is the grey issue of article 70 of the Vienna convention - that is to do with international treaties. So the EU may argue this case, but from what I have read the Article 50 treaty would trump the article 70 treaty (I think) because of the EU treaty itself already caters for this - with Article 50 - so it would be a weak arguing point from the EU.

And as we all know Eric - Article 50 does not say anything about money or rights or obligations. Article 50 says "the treaties shall cease to apply to the state in question" either when a withdrawal agreement takes effect, or two years after the Article 50 process has been triggered by the member state that intends to leave.

So in legal theory alone - walk away means walk away. But as we all know - we have things they want - and they have things we want. So a business driven compromise will be found. Politically fudged agreements with be put together in the 2 years post 2019 - I think anyway. With the main core agreement in place for 2019.

2018- to 2021 is a very long time in politics , we could have Prime Minister Blair II , Prime Minister Corbyn () , another Conservative PM. I dont think / hope there will be another General Election before 2021. When the new PM could offer a second referendum. I forgot to add in the vote in Parliament at the end of Article 50 - where MPs get to vote on accepting what is on offer - or walk away - at least I think that's what they are going to vote on.

Yeah I have done the 'read wiki for an hour' and lecture people on CCMB thing before, it is jolly good fun isn't it?

I think there is some acceptance outside of your rattling skull that we have agreed to certain actions, policies and initiatives which extend beyond the deadline. We are therefore morally obliged to settle up on these, I thought you had been a smart little cookie and calculated this (accounting for our share of any assets) because that would be a useful baseline (hence my question...).

[Eric Cartman]

Eric - why the anger mate ? what's up ?

What is angry about that?

[Eric Cartman]

There is not a court of morals that I've ever heard of - only a court of Laws. Fag packet time accounting - anything we owe 'morally' will be negated by the assets. It certainly isnt 50 billion. It is a negotiation though - and you or I arent part of that negotiation so it's all a bit silly.

If you trust wiki (Ive over estimated you) the information Ive read up on has been from full fact and the various BBC EU law articles. I used to do pubic law (a very long time ago) -so always kept an interest in boring stuff like this.

Are you sludge's lawyer?