UK in EU Challenge
UK in EU Challenge
This case is raising funds for its stretch target. Your pledge will be collected within the next 24-48 hours (and it only takes two minutes to pledge!)
Latest: Feb. 25, 2019
LEAVE TO APPEAL REFUSED
Following a full day's hearing on Thursday 21st February, before Lord Justice Hickinbottom and Lord Justice Haddon-Cave, we were refused leave to appeal our case, effectively ending our le...Read more
The UK in EU Challenge
In May and July 2018 the Electoral Commission found that the Leave campaigns, Leave.EU and Vote Leave, used corrupt and illegal practices in the EU Referendum campaign.
Some might say they “bent the rules” or “made mistakes”. That’s irrelevant. They broke the law. And in doing so, they flouted the core principles of UK democratic process.
The UK in EU Challenge seeks to restore the democratic balance and undo the outcomes of the Leave campaign's illegal behaviour. In order to do so, we need your help. This may be our last chance to take direct action and prevent an undemocratic Brexit. Please join our legal fight, contribute now and share this page with your friends, colleagues and on social media.
What is UK in EU Challenge doing?
We are asking the High Court to find on two issues that could fundamentally alter the Brexit process.
1. Because of the Leave campaign’s proven disregard for spending rules – to declare the Referendum result null and void.
2. To find that the ‘will of the people’ – the basis for Theresa May’s decision to trigger Article 50 – was influenced by the Leave campaign's fraudulent behaviour and, that the Prime Minister is wrong to rely on the Referendum result now the Electoral Commission has proven wrongdoing.
We’re asking you to help fund this legal battle and we have a matter of days to raise the funds we need to bring this legal challenge.
Any donation, large or small will make a difference and if you can share with your friends and colleagues and those affected negatively by Brexit it will make a huge difference.
UK in EU Challenge Mission
Our challenge is about basic fairness and adherence to the democratic process which prevents the buying of votes and power.
In General and Local elections, as well as Local Authority referendums, there are clear, legal safeguards that mean a court can overturn the result if cheating “may reasonably be supposed to have affected the result”.
We are asking the High Court to find that the EU Referendum result is void as a result of illegal practice by the Leave campaign.
Our case is not about ‘Leave’ or ‘Remain’; it’s about rights, fairness and democracy. We believe that the UK public is entitled to a fair vote on an issue of such huge importance to our future as a nation.
In summary, we believe that “the greater a vote’s impact, the greater must be a vote’s integrity”.
UK in EU Challenge – Legal Campaign
We have assembled a top-level legal team including solicitors and barristers who acted in the successful Article 50 Supreme Court challenge.
We have made an application to the High Court, seeking a declaration that the result of the EU Referendum is invalid and asking for the decision of the Prime Minister to invoke Article 50 to be quashed.
The High Court has recognised the case’s importance by reducing the usual timetable for the Government's response to 31 August 2018. So, time is of the essence.
WE NEED YOUR HELP
As the defendant in this case, the Prime Minister has access to the full resources of the State and a host of Government lawyers to contest our application.
We are confident that we have a great legal team to fight the case. But we do however need funds to ensure our advisers can devote the necessary hundreds of hours it will take to give the application the best chance of success.
We have already successfully raised £26,613.70 to fund these efforts, but we need to build on that total in order to pursue the application further.
Our application is founded on compelling legal grounds:
- The Electoral Commission’s findings of corruption and illegality were proven to the criminal burden of proof and as such are ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. In a General Election or Local Authority referendum, this could lead to the vote being annulled. We are asking the court to order that this should apply equally to something as critically important as the EU Referendum.
- The EU Referendum was not conducted in accordance with the UK’s constitutional principles, nor the statutory provisions regulating Referendum campaigning.
- When the Prime Minister took the decision to trigger the withdrawal process, Mrs May was already on notice of the real possibility of corrupt and illegal practices. The Electoral Commission had begun its investigation. She therefore acted unlawfully in failing to consider these factors by taking her decision when she did.
What is the timetable of the case?
The Claim was issued on 13 August 2018.
On 16 August 2018, Mr Justice Warby demonstrated the importance and urgency of this application by ordering that the Prime Minister must respond by serving Summary Grounds of Resistance no later than 31 August 2018, less than the usual period granted in Judicial Review proceedings.
Our response to the Summary Grounds is likely to be provided shortly thereafter.
The court will then decide whether or not our claim may be heard – estimated early to mid- September 2018.
If the court grants permission, a full hearing will take place – estimated October 2018.
What happens if we win?
The Referendum result and the Prime Minister’s decision to commence the withdrawal process will be quashed. The Government will then have a number of options, and may decide to initiate a new Referendum. This application has genuine legal merit.
Regular updates will be posted as and when further developments arise.
Please help us to fund the case; even a small contribution may have a huge effect on the future of our country. You may make your payment by clicking on the ‘Pledge Now’ button.
If you would like more information on the legal grounds of the application, you can read them in full by clicking here.
In the interests of transparency, we wish to make clear that the Crowd Justice platform will receive 3% of funds raised on this site with a further 2% going to the payment processor and 1% VAT.
Our legal team members are demonstrating their passion for this cause by acting on a discounted fee basis.
Thank you for your support and any help you can give - whether contributing and/or sharing you will truly make a difference.
Feb. 25, 2019
LEAVE TO APPEAL REFUSED
Following a full day's hearing on Thursday 21st February, before Lord Justice Hickinbottom and Lord Justice Haddon-Cave, we were refused leave to appeal our case, effectively ending our legal challenge.
Despite a brilliant performance by our QC Jessica Simor, the judges ruled against us, but have yet to publish their reasoned arguments. As soon as these are received, we will make them available.
Our hearing was specially selected for a live video feed, which only happens in cases that are considered to be “high profile and legally significant”. You can watch the live feed here.
I would like to thank all our supporters for making this legal journey possible. I can assure you that whilst legal channels may be closed, the UKinEU Challenge team will continue our battle to:
- restore the democratic balance
- undo the outcomes of the Leave Campaign's illegal activity
- campaign for a fair, honest and legal referendum that truly represents the will of the British people
Sue Wilson - Lead Claimant - on behalf of all the claimants - UK in EU Challenge
Feb. 11, 2019
WE'RE HEADING BACK TO COURT!
PERMISSION HEARING GRANTED
We are delighted to announce contact from the Civil Appeals Office, regarding our December appeal submission.
We have been granted a further oral hearing on Thursday 21st February at the Royal Courts of Justice, when we will have the opportunity of presenting our case for leave to appeal.
Normally, these proceedings are limited to a mere 20 minutes, but we have been granted a half-day in court.
The Prime Minister’s decision - to use the referendum results as the basis for leaving the EU - was irrational, given that result was procured by the illegal activities of the Leave campaign.
We look forward to making these points in court once again, and are grateful to be given this opportunity to do so. We remain confident in our strong legal arguments.
Thank you to all those that have supported us throughout this process and that continue to do so. We could not have come this far without you.
Please continue sharing our details with your friends, family and colleagues. Any donations, no matter how large or small, are most gratefully received!
Sue Wilson – Lead Claimant, on behalf of all claimants – UK in EU Challenge
Dec. 17, 2018
UK in EU Challenge lodge their appeal – 17/12/18
We have today made a submission to the Court of Appeal to overturn the court’s decision refusing permission for our Judicial Review to proceed at the High Court.
We are confident that our legal arguments are still strong, and hopeful that we will be granted permission for a “rolled-up” hearing in due course.
We would like to thank all those that have supported us throughout this process, and to those that continue to do so.
Please keep sharing our details with your friends, family and colleagues. If we are successful in this next step, we are going to need your support more than ever!
Sue Wilson – Lead Claimant, on behalf of all claimants – UK in EU Challenge
Dec. 10, 2018
COURT DECISION DELIVERED – APPEAL BEING CONSIDERED
Following today’s news that the judge has denied permission for a full hearing, we are now analysing the judgement in depth and considering whether to lodge an appeal.
At the oral hearing on Friday, our QC Jessica Simor argued that this case was of grave constitutional importance and that the public needed to have faith in the rule of law and democracy. She said that established Vote Leave illegalities meant the electorate could no longer be expected to respect the result and highlighted Theresa May’s repeated refusals to take any cognisance of the illegalities as “irrational”.
We believe wholeheartedly in everything Jessica said. However, Mr Justice Ouseley supported the argument by Sir James Eadie QC for the Government that the claim was out of time. While this is disappointing, the challenge is far from over. Should we decide to lodge an appeal, we will need your support more than ever, to allow this to go ahead.
We strongly believe our case still has merit. The Court has heard facts about repeated Vote Leave illegal payments and the ways in which these funds were directed to influence the Referendum outcome. In our opinion, to let this matter pass indicates a shocking level of tolerance for illegal behaviour in our democratic process. It would be a mistake to deny this wrongdoing and the impact it has had.
Everyone involved with the UK in EU Challenge would like to thank our legal advisers at Croft Solicitors, plus our barristers Jessica Simor QC, Patrick Green QC, Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Adam Wagner and Reanne MacKenzie, as well as the wider team for all their hard work.
We would also like to thank all of you for your support and for continuing to contribute to the crowdfunding campaign enabling this action.
Please do continue to share our updates with your friends, family and colleagues, to help raise awareness of this important case. We’ll be in touch with a further update soon. Thank you!
Susan Wilson on behalf of all the claimants
Dec. 7, 2018
CAMPAIGN UPDATE POST HEARING – 07 DECEMBER 2018
After a full day in Court, Mr Justice Ouseley has decided to defer his decision until next week.
This is not unexpected; the case raises issues of fundamental importance to the rule of law and UK democratic process, and therefore warrants further in-depth examination. It is vital that, as a society, we ensure that votes and power cannot be bought.
We remain optimistic that the Court will grant permission for a full hearing.
We also maintain our firm belief that the Referendum result cannot be considered the ‘will of the people’.
The Leave campaign’s fraudulent behaviour has been proven by the Electoral Commission and we are continually frustrated that the Government fails to acknowledge the impact of this illegality and continues to defend its position.
The UK in EU Challenge team would like to thank our legal advisers at Croft Solicitors with our barristers Jessica Simor QC, Patrick Green QC, Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Adam Wagner and Reanne MacKenzie, as well as the wider team for their excellent work.
Importantly, we would also like to thank all our supporters, especially those who continue to contribute to the crowdfunding campaign that is enabling this action. Please keep sharing and donating to help this important cause.
We are proud to represent those who believe it’s important not only to remain in the EU, but also to protect the foundations of UK democracy and the rule of law.
We will update further once we have a final decision about the case.
Sue Wilson on behalf of the UK in EU Challenge claimants
Dec. 7, 2018
CAMPAIGN UPDATE AS OF FRIDAY 7TH DECEMBER
Today we head to the High Court for our Oral Hearing, where the judge will decide whether the case can continue.
We’ll provide a further update once the hearing has concluded and we have a result.
Please do continue to share our campaign updates and donate to help cover the costs of this important legal case. Everything you do and give is very much appreciated and helps ensure that our voting process is fair and can be trusted.
Sue Wilson and the UK in EU Challenge claimants
Dec. 5, 2018
CAMPAIGN UPDATE AS OF 05 DECEMBER 2018
It’s our oral hearing at the High Court this Friday 7th December. We are optimistic the judge will rule that our case has merit and grant permission for a full hearing. At the heart of our case is the need to ensure we have a democratic process that prevents the buying of power and votes.
We are asking the High Court to rule that illegal campaign spending during the course of the Referendum means the result cannot now be considered the ‘will of the people’ and therefore the Brexit process should be halted.
We have new expert evidence and Croft Solicitors, our legal advisers, have asked the High Court for permission to submit this as part of our hearing. Professor Philip N. Howard, Director of the Oxford Internet Institute, a Professor of Internet Studies and a Fellow at Balliol College at the University of Oxford, has concluded that it was very likely that the advertising overspend on Facebook by Vote Leave in the last days of the EU Referendum campaign in 2016 changed the outcome. In his own words, Professor Howard said: “Having studied its digital campaign in line with voter psychology and behaviour, my professional opinion is that it is very likely that the excessive spending by Vote Leave altered the result of the Referendum.” You can read Professor Howard’s report here.
More than ever we need your help. Please donate whatever you can to help us cover the costs of this important and landmark legal case. Members of the public MUST be able to rely on the fact that the process behind any vote, not least one so far-reaching for the UK, is carried out lawfully, free from corrupt and illegal practices. This is clearly not the case here. Please continue to share the UK in EU Challenge case with your networks to drive donations and raise awareness.
The more people we can reach, the better. For more information, please visit https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/ ukineuchallenge/. With thanks for your support Sue Wilson and the UK in EU Challenge claimants.
Nov. 7, 2018
PM ASKED TO RECONSIDER HER POSITION
We wrote yesterday to Prime Minister Theresa May’s lawyers asking that she rethink her position following recent developments related to the Vote Leave campaign. In light of the Electoral Commission’s decision to refer Arron Banks to the National Crime Agency, we are asking Mrs. May to reconsider her position and in particular, her refusal to take any action in relation to recent discoveries.
Questions were raised recently in parliament about the failure of the Metropolitan Police to proceed with their investigation of Vote Leave’s potential criminal activity, citing ‘political sensitivities’. More revelations followed questioning the source of Arron Banks’ donation, the largest in political history, when the matter was referred to the National Crime Agency last week. The ICO's further report this week saw Banks fined for breaches of data protection law, when it was revealed that customers of his insurance company were targeted during the Leave campaign.
It seems that almost daily there are further findings of wrong-doing by those associated with the Vote Leave Campaign. We have continued to raise questions as these developments have unfolded, but the government has failed to respond.
We have heard far too often that Brexit is the ‘will of the people’. On the evidence now available, it cannot be said with any degree of certainty that the result would have remained the same had the law not been broken. May can no longer be sure what the ‘will of the people’ was in 2016, or indeed what it is today.
We look forward to the opportunity of presenting our case to the Royal Courts of Justice on Friday 7th December. We think it is time that we and the country got some answers.
Nov. 1, 2018
ORAL HEARING DATE ANNOUNCEMENT
Following our recent submission to the High Court, we are delighted to announce that we now have a date for our oral hearing. The date has been set for Friday 7th December 2018.
Unusually for this type of matter, the Government will also be attending and making representations via its top Barrister, First Treasury Counsel, Sir James Eadie QC. Sir James represented the Government in the Gina Miller Article 50 proceedings: ‘R (Miller) vs Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union’.
While our challenge may focus on Brexit, at its heart is the need to ensure we have a democratic process that prevents the buying of power and votes.
We will aim to convince the High Court that our case is arguable, and not out of time - essentially arguing against the court’s current rationale for denying permission to proceed. We hope to be granted a substantive hearing, and that our case be expedited due to the urgency of our challenge.
With time running out, it is vital we raise awareness and donations to cover the legal fees associated with this very important case.
Please give whatever you can and share the UK in EU Challenge details with your friends, family and colleagues. The more people we reach who can offer their support, the greater our chances of success.
Thank you for your continued support.
Sue Wilson Lead Claimant, on behalf of all UK in EU Challenge claimants
Sept. 28, 2018
NOTICE OF RENEWAL SUBMITTED BY CLAIMANTS
Today we have submitted a Renewal Notice to the High Court asking for it to reconsider our claim in an oral hearing.
With the UK’s intention to leave the EU due to take place on 29 March 2019, we’ve also asked for our claim to be expedited to avoid it becoming academic.
On 16 August 2018, Mr Justice Warby agreed “that the question of permission deserves urgent consideration” so we are hopeful of receiving a date for the hearing soon.
As you know, our challenge may focus on Brexit, but at its heart is the need to ensure we have a democratic process that prevents the buying of power and votes.
This all makes our fundraising drive more important than ever.
It is critical that we continue to raise awareness of the UK in EU Challenge and drive donations as these will help us to pay the legal fees needed for the oral hearing.
Please help by sharing our story and encouraging people to donate whatever they can. Anything you can continue to give is also received with our gratitude.
We’ll provide a further update once we know more.
Sue Wilson on behalf of all the claimants
For further information, you can download the relevant documents below:
Sept. 24, 2018
CLAIMANTS REQUEST ORAL HEARING FOLLOWING HIGH COURT DECISION
The High Court has decided that on first review of the papers, the UK in EU Challenge cannot proceed, primarily on the basis that the claim is out of time.
We are contesting this and we need your help.
Our legal team is now requesting an oral hearing at the High Court to argue that we acted as quickly as possible after publication of the Electoral Commission findings. We also plan to highlight the claim’s merits and discuss inaccuracies within the Government’s response.
While it is a hurdle for our legal claim, this wasn’t unexpected and we certainly aren’t stopping here.
As far as we are concerned, this ‘out of time’ finding is incorrect.
Knowing what we know about the Electoral Commission having wrongly applied the law to the referendum, it is impossible to argue that the referendum result was an accurate reflection of the will of the people - and this is what we’ll be arguing strongly in court.
We now need your help even more. It is critical that we continue to raise awareness of the UK in EU Challenge and drive donations as these will help us to pay the legal fees needed for the oral hearing.
Please help by sharing our story and encouraging people to donate whatever they can. Anything you can continue to give is also hugely welcome.
We’ll continue to update you all as things progress.
Sue Wilson on behalf of all the claimants
Sept. 9, 2018
UK in EU Challenge have published the government's response and our reply
Please find the latest campaign update as of 8 a.m. on Monday 10th September.
On Friday 31st August, the Government responded to the UK in EU Challenge with Summary Grounds of Resistance as per the High Court’s ruling. We have now published the Summary Grounds and our reply here, including a list of supplementary questions for the Prime Minister's lawyers.
Today Parliament will debate a petition to ‘Rescind Art.50 if Vote Leave has broken Electoral Laws regarding 2016 referendum’. You can find the details here and we hope this will bring our challenge into the mainstream consciousness.
As you can see, we urgently need to keep raising awareness and driving donations so we can secure the legal support this campaign requires.
Please continue to share our website with your networks and ask people to give what they can.
With thanks for your ongoing help.
There are no public comments on this case page.