Brexitla secesión de la Unión Europea entre teoría y realidad

Referencias bibliográficas

• Acuerdo Un nuevo régimen para el Reino Unido en la Unión Europea, aprobado por el Consejo Europeo celebrado los días 18 y 19 de febrero de 2016 (publicado en el DOUE C 69 I, de 23.02.2016).
• Barber, Nick; Hickman, Tom & King, Jeff (2016): «Pulling the Article 50 ‘Trigger’: Parliament’s Indispensable Role», U.K. Constitutional Law Blog, 27.06.2016 (https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/)
• Barnard, Catherine (2016): «Law and Brexit», Oxford Review of Economic Politicy, vol. 33, n.º S1, pp. S9-S10;
• Bell, John (2017): «La Cour suprême de Royaume-Uni et le Brexit», Revue française de droit administratif, n.º 2, p. 222.
• Berglund, S. (2006): «Prison or Voluntary Cooperation? The Possibility of Withdrawal from the European Union», en Scandinavian Political Studies, vol. 29, n.º 2, p. 154
• Biondi, Filippo (2017): «A mountain to climb; the looming problem of the Northern Irish border», Brexit Blog - LSE Blogs, publicado el 23.06.2017
• Blair, Tony (2017): «Brexit and the Centre», accesible en el sitio web del Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (http://institute.global/news/brexit-and-centre); B
• Bogdanor, Vernon (2017): «A second Brexit referendum? It’s looking more likely by the day», en el diario The Guardian del 3 de agosto;
• Bogdanor, Vernon (2017): «Britain and the EU: In or Out - One Year On», Gresham Lecture impartida el 21 de junio de 2017 (https://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/britain-and-the-eu-in-or-out-one-year-on);
• Brewer-Carías, Allan R. (2017): «El caso Brexit ante los jueces constitucionales del Reino Unido: comentarios a la Sentencia de la Alta Corte de Justicia de 3 de noviembre de 2016, confirmada por el Tribunal Supremo en Sentencia de 24 de enero de 2017», Revista de Administración Pública, n.º 202, pp. 133-156,
• Bustos Gisbert, Rafael(2017): «La desnudez de la Constitución británica. Crónica marciana de la Sentencia de la Suprema Corte de Justicia del Reino Unido de 24 de enero de 2017», Revista Española de Derecho Europeo, n.º 68.
• Castellá Andreu, Josep M.ª (2016): «El Referéndum sobre el Brexit: una historia inacabada», Revista de Derecho Político, n.º 97, pp. 297-334.
• Closa Montero, Carlos: «Is Article 50 Reversible? On politics beyond legal doctrine», Verfassungs Blog - On Matters Constitutional (http://verfassungsblog.de/) (4 de enero de 2017)
• Consejo Europeo: Orientaciones consecutivas a la notificación del Reino Unido en virtud del Artículo 50 del TUE, Bruselas, 29 de abril de 2017.
• Craig, Paul (2016): «Brexit: A Drama in Six Acts», European Law Review, 4
• Craig, Paul: «Brexit: Foundational Constitutional and Interpretative Principles, I & II», Oxford Human Rights Hub, 27 y 28 de octubre de 2016
• Craig, Paul: «The Process: Brexit and the anatomy of Arti¬cle 50», en Fabbrini, Federico (ed.): The Law and Politics of Brexit, Oxford: OUP, 2017, cap. 3);
• Craig, Robert (2016): «Casting Aside Clanking Medieval Chains: Prerogative, Statute and Article 50 after the EU Referen¬dum», The Modern Law Review, vol. 79, n.º 6, p. 1043.
• Curtice, John (2016): «A Question of Culture or Economics? Public Attitudes to the European Union in Britain», The Political Quarterly, vol. 87, n.º 2, pp. 209-218
• Declaración de los Jefes de Estado y de Gobierno de los 27 Estados miembro, reunión informal, Bruselas, 15 de diciembre de 2016.
• Departamento del Tesoro del Gobierno británico publicó un White Paper (HM Treasury Analysis: the inmediate economic impact of leaving the EU, Cm. 9292, mayo de 2016).
• Douglas-Scott, Sionaidh (2016): «Brexit, Article 50 and the Contested British Constitution», The Modern Law Review, vol. 79, n.º 6, pp. 1020-1022
• Edward, David and Nic Shuibhne, Niahm (2016): «“While Europe’s eye is Fix’d on Mighty Things”: Implications of the Brexit Vote for Scotland», dentro de la sección «Brexit: What next?», European Law Review, n.º 41, pp. 481-482
• Eeckhout, Piet & Frantziou, Eleni (2016): Brexit and Article 50 TEU: A Consti-tutionalist Reading, London: UCL European Institute, Working Paper, December 2016, pp. 5 ss.
• El White Paper titulado The United Kingdom’s exit from and new partnership with the European Union, Cm. 9417, de febrero de 2017, es un compendio de las pretensiones —y de las convicciones— del Gobierno del RU.
• Electoral Commission, The: The 2016 EU Referendum. Report on the 23 June 2016 referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union, September 2016,
• Eleftheriadis, Pavlos (2017): «Constitutional Illegitimacy over Brexit», The Political Quarterly, vol. 88, n.º 2, pp. 182-188.
• Elliot, Mark & Tierney, Stephen (2017): «The ‘Great Repeal Bill’ and Delegated Powers», U.K. Constitutional Law Blog (7.03.2017) (https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/)
• Elliot, Mark (2016): «Should there, and does there have to, be a second referendum?», en el Blog Public Law for Everyone, (8.07.2016) (https://publiclawforeveryone.com/);
• Elliot, Mark (2017): «A ‘blatant power grab’? The Scottish Government on the EU (Withdrawal) Bill», en el Blog Public Law for Everyone, (10.08.2017) (https://publiclawforeveryone. com/)
• Elliot, Mark (2017): «The 2017 Queen’s Speech and the (no longer «Great») Repeal Bill», Public Law for Everyone (Blog) (7.03.2017) (https://publiclawforeveryone.com/)
• Elliot, Mark (2017): «The Devil in the detail: Twenty questions about the EU (Withdrawal) Bill», Public Law for Everyone (Blog) (14.08.2017) (https://publiclawforeveryone.com/)
• Elliot, Mark (2017): «The Government’s White Paper on the «Great Repeal Bill»: Some preli¬minary thoughts», Public Law for Everyone (Blog) (30.03.2017) (https://publiclawforeveryone.com/) califica la denominación del Proyecto de Ley como «spectacularly misleadingly dubbed».
• Elliot, Mark (2017): «The Supreme Court’s Judgment in Miller: in search of Consti-tutional Principle», Cambridge Law Journal, vol. 76, n.º 2, pp. 257-288.
• Elliott, Mark (2016): «On why, as a matter of law, triggering Article 50 does not require Parliament to legislate», en Public Law for Everyone (Blog), 30.06.2016 (https://publiclawforeveryone.com/).
• European Commission: European Commission’s draft negotiating directives for Article 50 negotiations with the United Kingdom - Q&A, Brus¬sels, 3 May 2017
• European Union Committee: Brexit and the EU budget, 15th Report of Session 2016–17, HL Paper 125, 4 de marzo de 2017, p. 38
• Feynman, Richard: The Meaning of it All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist, Boston: Addi¬son-Wesley, 1998
• Freedland, Jonathan (2017): «There is still a real chance for a second Brexit referendum», en el diario The Guardian del 14 de julio;
• Gee, Gra¬ham & Young, Alison L. (2016): «Regaining sovereignty? Brexit, the UK Parliament and the Common Law», European Public Law, vol. 22, n.º 1, pp. 131-148
• Goodwin, Matthew J. & Heath, Oliver (2016): «The 2016 Refe¬rendum, Brexit and the Left Behind: An Aggregate-level Analysis fo the Result», The Political Quarterly, vol. 87, n.º 3, pp. 323-332;
• Heath, Oliver & Goodwin, Matthew (2017): «The 2017 General Election, Brexit and the Return of Two-Party Politics: An Aggregate-Level Analysis of the Result», The Political Quarterly, vol. 88, n.º 1, pp. 1-14
• High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland: McCord’s (Raymons) Application¸Queen’s Division (Judicial Review) [2016] NIQB 85, Judgment de 28 de octubre de 2016
• High Court of Justice of England and Wales. Queen’s Bench Division. Divisional Court (2016): R. (Miller & Dos Santos) v. Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, Judgment of 3.11.2016, [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin.), Case N.º CO/3809/2016 & CO/3281/2016.
• Hill, J.A. (1982): «The European Economic Community: The Right of Member State Withdrawal», en Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 12, n.º 3, pp. 335 ss.
• Hillion, Chr. (2015): «Accession and Withdrawal in the EU Law of the European Union», en Chalmers, D. & Arnull, A. (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of European Union Law, Oxford: OUP, pp.
• Hix, Simon (2016): «Does the UK Have Influence in the EU Legislative Process?», The Political Quarterly, vol. 87, n.º 2, pp. 200-208.
• Hofmeister, H. (2010): «‘Should I Stay or Should I Go?’ - A Critical Analysis of the Right to Withdraw from the EU», European Law Journal, vol. 16, n.º 5, p. 598; en el mismo sentido, House of Commons. Foreign Affairs Committee: Article 50 Negotiations: Implications of a ‘no deal’, cit., p. 6
• House of Commons. Exiting the European Union Committee: The Government’s Negotiating Objectives: The White Paper, Third Report of Session 2016-17, HC 1125, 4 de abril de 2017, pp. 82 ss.,
• House of Commons. Exiting the European Union Committee: The process for exiting the European Union and the Government’s negotiating objectives: Government Response to the Committee’s First Report, HC 1101, 17 de marzo de 2017, p. 11,
• House of Commons. Foreign Affairs Committee: Article 50 Negotiations: Implications of a ‘no deal’, HC 1077, 12 de marzo de 2017, p. 12,
• House of Commons. Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee: Lessons learned from the EU referendum, Twelfth Report of Session 2016–17, HC 496, 12 de abril de 2017
• House of Lords. European Union Committee: Brexit: UK-Irish relations, 6th Report of Session 2016–17, HL Paper 76, de 12 de diciembre de 2016
• House of Lords. European Unon Committee: Brexit: devolution, 4th. Report of Session 2017–19, HL Paper 9, de 19 de julio de 2017
• House of Lords. Select Committee on the Constitution (2016): The ‘Great Repeal Bill’ and delegated powers, 9th. Report of Session 2016-17, HL Paper 123, 7 de marzo de 2017.
• House of Lords. Select Committee on the Constitution: The invoking of article 50, 4th. Report of Session 2016-17, HL Paper 44, 13 de septiembre de 2016, p. 4
• John B. S. Haldane: Daedalus or the Future of Science, en Dronamraju, K. R. (ed.) (1995): Haldane’s Daedalus Revisited, Oxford: OUP
• K. Starmer, en el dominical The Observer: «No ‘constructive ambiguity’. Labour will avoid Brexit cliff edge for UK economy», del 26 de agosto de 2017.
• King, Jeff & Barber, Nick (2016): «In Defence of Miller», U.K. Constitutional Law Blog, 22.11.2016 (https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/);
• Lippert, Barbara; Hughes, Kirsty; Grabbe, Heather Becker, Peter: British and German Interests in EU Enlargement. Conflict and Cooperation, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, London-New York, 2001.
• López Basaguren, A. (2013) «Los referendos de secesión de Quebec y la doctrina del Tribunal Supremo de Canadá», en Sáenz Royo, E. y Contreras Casado, M. (eds.): La participación política directa. Referéndum y consultas populares, Comuniter, Zaragoza, 2013, pp. 53-91
• López Basaguren, A. (2015): «Escocia: referéndum sobre la independencia y propuesta de reforma de la Devolution», en Revista Española de Derecho Constitucional, nº. 104, pp. 135 ss.
• McGuinness, Terry and Gower, Melanie (2017): The Common Travel Area, and the special status of Irish nationals in UK law, House of Commons Library, Briefing paper n.º 7661, 9 de junio de 2017.
• Miller, Vaughne: The 1974-75 UK Renegotiating of ECC Membership and Referendum, House of Commons, Briefing Paper Number 7253, 13 July 2015
• Miller, Vaughne; Lang, Arabella & Simson-Caird, Jack: Brexit: Article 50 TEU and the EU Court, House of Commons Library, Briefing paper n. 7763, 14 de noviembre de 2016B
• Morrow, Duncan & Byrne, Jonny (2017): «Northern Ireland after Brexit: a fragile peace put in jeopardy», Brexit Blog - LSE Blogs, publicado el 11.01.2017
• Phillipson, Gavin (2016): «A Dive into Deep Waters: Article 50, the Prerogative and Parliament», The Modern Law Review, vol. 79, n.º 6, pp. 1019-1089,
• Piris, Jean-Claude: «Article 50 is not for ever and the UK could change its mind», en el dia¬rio Financial Times del 1 de septiembre de 2016;
• Qvortrup, Matt (2016): «Referendums on Membership and European Integration 1972-2015», The Political Quarterly, vol. 87, n.º 1, pp. 61-68,
• Russell, Bertrand: Icarus or the Future of Science, 1924.
• Sarmiento Rodriguez-Escudero, Daniel: «Miller, Brexit and the (maybe not so evil) Court of Justice», Despite our Differences (Blog), el 8 de noviembre de 2016 (https://despiteourdifferencesblog.wordpress.com/) [también publicado en la misma fecha en Verfassungs Blog - On Matters Constitutional (http://verfassungsblog.de/)];
• Scottish Government: Scotland’s place in Europe, Edinburgh, 2016
• Simson Caird, Jack: «The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill: constitutional change and legal continuity», Second Reading - The BREXIT: House of Commons Library Blog (18.07.2017) (https://secondreading.uk/)
• Tathaum, A. F. (2012): «‘Don’t mention Divorce at the Wedding, Darling’: EU Accession and Withdrawal after Lisbon», en Biondi, A.; Eeckhout, P & Ripley, S. (eds.): EU Law after Lisbon, Oxford: OUP, p. 143,
• The Queen’s Speech and Associated Background Briefing, on the ocasion of the Opening of Parliament on Wednesday 21 June 2017 (accesible en el sitio web del Gobierno británico: https://www.gov.uk/).
• Tonge, Johathan: The Impact and Consequences of Brexit for Northern Ireland, European Parlia¬ment, Briefing, Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, PE 583 116
• Toynbee, Polly (2017): «Can Brexit be stopped? Not by a second referendum», en el diario The Guardian del 17 de julio
• UK Government: Northern Ireland and Ireland. Position paper, publicado el 16 de agosto de 2017, pp. 7-10
• UK’s Government. Department for Exiting the European Union: Legislating for the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, Cm. 9446, marzo de 2017128 ALBERTO LÓPEZ BASAGUREN
• UK’s Supreme Court (2017): R. (on the application of Miller and another) v. Secretary of State for Exi¬ting the European Union, Judgment of 24.01.2017, [2017] UKSC 5 (On appeals from: [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin) and [2016] NIQB 85)
• Weale, Albert (2017): «The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit», The Political Quarterly, vol. 88, n.º 2, pp. 170-181
• White, Hannah & Rutter, Jill (2017): Legislating Brexit. The Great Repeal Bill and the wider legislative cha¬llenge, Institute for Government, IFG Analysis, marzo 2017
• YouGov publicó el 15 de junio de 2017 [YouGov-UK (2017): Survey on Brexit, 15 de junio 2017 (accesible en https://yougov.co.uk/)]
• Young, Alison L. (2017): «R. (on the Application of Miller) v. Secretary of State for Exiting the EU: Thriller or Vanilla?», European Law Review, n.º 42, pp. 280-295; Feldman, David (2017): «Pulling a trigger or starting a journey? Brexit in the Supreme Court», Cambridge Law Journal, vol. 76, n.º 2, pp. 217-223;