Can an individual bring a case to the European Court of Justice wrt non Eu law or are people talking bunkum?

[Cailleach1]

People are saying that Gina miller can refer the case to the ECJ if the Supreme Court rules that Gov't triggering Article without the approval of Parliament is Constitutional.

Looking at the website of the ECJ, it doesn't look like it can be referred there. It seems it is to do with EU law/treaties only and in relation to that. Also it looks like either a member state or the Commission has to bring the case.

Does anyone know if this is the case? If it is why are people still saying Gina Miller could go to the ECJ.?

www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_1.3.10.html

Just one other thing. Gina MIller came from her home country (British Guyana) to the UK at a young age like Mo Farah came from Somalia. But nobody is saying he is foreigner and his races are really won by Somalia. Why are people tabloids therefore referring to her as being being foreign and elite?

As far as I can tell, some people think that a referral to the ECJ could happen because:

• the A50 high court ruling was predicated on the premise that, once triggered, A50 is irreversible.
• however, no one has ever tested this in court, so there may be some advantage for the government in doing so (if A50 is reversible, it might have a better case at appeal).

I think. Not a lawyer.

So it would be the UK government (parliament?) referring to the ECJ to clarify if A50 is reversible in the interests of Brexit. I imagine the Leave etc. don't want to do that even if it was favourable to the interests of Brexit. They wouldn't want any interpretation outside those made by Sovereign UK institutions, would they? That would make them ...well... inconsistent.

Well, I guess the obvious gambit would have been to refer the reversibility of A50 to the ECJ before the current appeal, but that's not going to happen. I guess that someone will find a way of taking it to the court at some point.

Why are people tabloids therefore referring to her as being being foreign and elite?

Snort. Do you really need that one answering for you OP?

OP Gina Miller's list of sins is long; female, coloured, foreign, can talk in complete sentences, can hold her own on tv and Faridge had to talk over her as he was losing the argument.

What's not to like?

I believe that Gina Miller has said that she would not take it to the european court

It could go to the ECJ depending on the reasons given for the decision. If the argument is that some Act of Parliament says x, y, z and the 'loser' disagrees, it can't go to the ECJ because it's a matter of national law. If the argument is that an EU treaty says x,y,z and the 'loser' disagrees then it can go to the ECJ because it's a matter of EU law.

At the High Court both parties accepted that triggering article 50 is irreversible. If the government change tack and say it is reversible, and therefore Gina's earlier argument is invalid, then the ECJ may become involved. The losing party could appeal it, or more likely the Supreme Court asks the ECJ to rule on that particular legal point before the Supreme Court makes its decision.