Brexit: Boris Johnson claims EU has not explained in detail why it objects to his alternative backstop plan - as it happened
Rolling coverage of the day's political developments as they happen
5.30pm BST
If I may put the point another way, the government accepts that in executing its political policy it must comply with the 2019 Act. That being the government's clearly stated position before the court, there is no need for coercive orders against it or against the prime minister to be pronounced. The court should not pronounce coercive orders (or decree for interdict) unless it has been established on the basis of cogent evidence that it is truly necessary for such orders to be granted. In my opinion, that has not been done in the present case.
I would add only this. I approach matters on the basis that it would be destructive of one of the core principles of constitutional propriety and of the mutual trust that is the bedrock of the relationship between the court and the crown for the prime minister or the government to renege on what they have assured the court that the prime minister intends to do.
5.04pm BST
"Ulster says No," is one of the historic cries of unionism. The DUP's Sammy Wilson has inverted that in a statement - one of several we've had from the party recently - strongly criticising the Irish government for its stance on Brexit. Wilson said:
It seems the 'not an inch' approach in Dublin will lead to no deal. How times have changed. Its now a case of 'Dublin Says No'.
The DUP has worked with the prime minister to place a reasonable proposal on the table. It may not be perfect but it's a fair deal. It recognises our unique situation and respects the referendum result ...
Continue reading...