2. What assessment has the Counsel General made of the implications for Wales of the Wightman case in the Scottish courts regarding Article 50? OAQ52826

Well, the case raises an important question around the interpretation of article 50, which it would be helpful to have answered to ensure that a fully informed decision can be taken on any withdrawal agreement reached between the UK Government and the European Union, or in the case of a 'no deal' outcome.

Thank you for that answer, Counsel General. Clearly, the chaotic scenes that we have seen in Westminster over the failure of the UK Government to actually get anywhere near a deal at this point in time raises this much more to the like of: what can we do to extend or even revoke article 50? And I know that this case puts it back in the ECJ situation, but it's not likely to actually report back until some time towards the end of the year, maybe even after a meaningful vote. So, how can you take this message forward to the UK Government, that the shambles they are creating, they should be addressing this matter, and perhaps looking at the possibility of revoking article 50, so that we can get that extra time that everyone is crying for? Because the time is so short, it's unlikely that we're going to complete anything by March 2019.

Well, I thank the Member for that further question. It may be helpful just to remind ourselves what's at stake in the case itself. The claim alleges that the UK Government's interpretation of article 50, and in particular its apparent assertion that it's not legally possible to unilaterally revoke an article 50 notification, is incorrect. That's the argument being put. The UK Government's response is simply that it has no intention of revoking it, and therefore the question doesn't arise of whether it's legally possible to do that or not.

The Scottish courts—the Inner House of the Court of Session—agreed to refer that question to the Court of Justice of the European Union, and there's a provisional date, as I think his question implied, of 27 November for that to be determined. But the UK Government has sought leave now to appeal against the reference to the CJEU, which will be heard on 8 November, in Scotland. I've been keeping a close eye on the progress of this case, as he will have anticipated, and there has obviously been an increase now in the anticipation of the possibility of a 'no deal' Brexit, which, as we have repeatedly said, would be catastrophic, both for Wales and for the UK.

I think the best way to describe the potential outcome of this case is that it's important context for the discussions and the decisions that will need to be taken in the course of the next few weeks and months. I think it needs to be recognised that any UK Government would have to think very carefully indeed before taking the step of revoking article 50, even if we discover from the court process that it's possible. The Welsh Government's position is that the result of the referendum means that the debate should be about the form and not the fact of Brexit, but, as his question makes clear, the disastrous and incompetent handling of the negotiations by the UK Government, which is making a 'no deal' scenario ever-more likely, means that we need to have clarity about all the legal options that might be available as those decisions and discussions unfold.