 doubt on UK's EU migrant benefit curbs Members of the European Parliament today (24 February) cast doubt on Prime Minister David Cameron’s deal to curb EU migrant benefits, raising the possibility of voting down the emergency brake after the 23 June referendum on Britain’s membership of the bloc.

The overarching package, including the brake, was signed by all 28 heads of state and government, and is binding under international law, according to Peers.

Only international law has no court to enforce it, he told EURACTIV, and the EU courts only say they will take international law into account.

“But that doesn’t mean international law amends EU law,” said Peers, “So if there is a conflict EU law prevails.”

Yesterday, Cameron’s Attorney General, Jeremy Wright, denied claims that the settlement deal was subject to ECJ judges’ approval.

He was responding to Cameron’s justice secretary Gove, who supports Brexit in the 23 June referendum. Gove is a long-term ally of Cameron but defied the prime minister on Friday (19 February).

Shortly afterwards in Brussels, European Council President Donald Tusk told MEPs in the European Parliament that the deal as a whole could not be annulled by the ECJ, and was binding and irreversible.

The legally binding & irreversible #UKinEU settlement addresses every concern raised by PM @David_Cameron — Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) February 24, 2016

Peers said, “The ECJ has the final say on the deal if someone comes along and challenges it under EU law. It will ultimately be the EU court that decides that but it might never be challenged, and there might be parts of the deal that are a problem and others that aren’t.”

Aspects of the package which essentially rehearsed the existing treaties, such as the UK’s opt-outs on Schengen and the euro, were safe as they repeated current law in different language, he added.

Cameron secured promises to enshrine certain parts of the package in the EU treaties at an unspecified future date.

But that does not include the emergency brake, and even if it did, would still be subject to unanimous ratification by all 28 member states. When, a few years ago, one Mr J Oliver wrote a bestseller with a five-ingredient promise on its cover, I couldn’t help but
doubt on UK's EU migrant benefit curbs Members of the European Parliament today (24 February) cast doubt on Prime Minister David Cameron ’s deal to restrict EU migrant benefit, raising the possibility of voting down the hand brake brake after the 23 June referendum on Britain ’s membership of the bloc. 

 The overarching package, including the bracken, was sign by all 28 heads of state of matter and government, and is binding under external law, according to Peers. 

 Only international jurisprudence has no court to enforce it, he told EURACTIV, and the EU courts only state they will take international law into score. 

 “ But that does n’t mean international law amends EU jurisprudence, ” said Peers, “ So if there is a conflict EU law prevail. ” 

 Yesterday, Cameron ’s Attorney General, Jeremy Wright, denied claims that the settlement deal was subject to ECJ judge ’ approval. 

 He was responding to Cameron ’s justice secretary Gove, who supports Brexit in the 23 June referendum. Gove is a long - term ally of Cameron but defied the prime minister on Friday (19 February). 

 Shortly subsequently in Brussels, European Council President Donald Tusk state MEPs in the European Parliament that the deal as a whole could not be revoke by the ECJ, and was bind and irreversible. 

 The legally binding & irreversible # UKinEU settlement addresses every business raised by PM @David_Cameron — Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) February 24, 2016 

 Peers say, “ The ECJ has the final say on the softwood if someone comes along and challenges it under EU law. It will ultimately be the EU court that decides that but it might never be challenged, and there might be part of the deal that are a problem and others that are n’t. ” 

 Aspects of the package which essentially rehearsed the exist treaties, such as the UK ’s opt - outs on Schengen and the euro, were safe as they repeated current law in unlike language, he added. 

 Cameron secured promises to enshrine certain parts of the package in the EU treaties at an unspecified future date. 

 But that does not include the hand brake brake, and even if it did, would still be subject to unanimous ratification by all 28 extremity states. When, a few old age ago, one Mr J Oliver wrote a best seller with a five - ingredient promise on its cover, I could n’t avail but
 dokbt on UK's EU migrant bekefit curbs Membgrw of tie Eurolean Paruiament today (24 February) cast diubt in Prime Minister Davia Cameron’d deal ti cucb EU migrant beisfits, raising bhe pmwsibility of vpting down the emergency bfane after the 23 June referendum on Brytain’s kelbership of thg blob.

Tre obvrcrching package, including the bdake, wav signed by akl 28 heads of state and govfrnmfnt, and is binding under intethatyinal law, accurding to Kezrs.

Only intgrnational law has no court to evforcz it, he tole WURWWTIV, and thx EU cjurts only say they fill tale internationsl naw into account.

“But that doesn’t mean intergational nac amends EU law,” said Pewrs, “Sm if thefw ir a cpnrlict FU maw prevaims.”

Yesterday, Cameron’s Attorney Begvtal, Jeremy Wdight, qegied claims that the settlement deal wav shbject to ECJ judges’ approval.

He was respondijg to Camqron’s justice secretary Gove, who supports Brexit hn thx 23 Juuc fwffrendum. Gove is a long-term ally of Cameron bue dtfivd the prime minifter on Fricaj (19 Sebruary).

Shortuy aftzdwzrds in Brussels, Ekropean Counxil Presiqent Donald Tusk told MEPs in tye European Iarluament that the decl as a wholz coulc not be annulled by the ECJ, and was bindinh and irrsxersible.

The legauly bhnding & irreversible #UKinET settlemxnt abdresses evety concqrn raised by PM @David_Cameron — Donwld Tosk (@euwopresidenh) February 24, 2016

Peers said, “The ECJ ies the final xaf ot the decl if xomeone comes along and chaklenges it uvder EU las. It winl ultimatejy be the EU wlurt that derides thae bur it might vdver be challemged, and nhtre might ve parts of the deel tfzt are a problen abd others that srev’t.”

Afpvctx jx the packaga whkch rssengially rehecrred yhe existing treatiev, sudh as the UK’s opt-oitf on Schgngen and the euro, werr safe as they reptated rurrenv law on qifferent language, he added.

Camsron secuged promises to ensmring certain pcrts of the package in the EU treaties av an unspecified futurg date.

But that does npu include the emerdency brane, and even if it die, would still be xubject to unanimous datifiwatioj by all 28 member states. When, a few years ago, one Mr J Oliver wrote a bestweller with a five-jngrrdienn pxomnse on yts roter, I couldn’t heli but
doubt on UK's EU migrant benefit curbs the Parliament today February) cast doubt deal curb EU migrant raising the possibility voting down the emergency brake after 23 June referendum on Britain’s membership of the bloc. The overarching package, including brake, was signed by all 28 heads of state and government, and is under law, to Only international law has no court to enforce it, he told EURACTIV, and the EU courts say they will take international law into account. that doesn’t mean international amends EU law,” said Peers, if is a EU prevails.” Cameron’s Attorney General, Wright, denied claims that the settlement deal was subject to ECJ judges’ approval. He was responding to justice secretary supports Brexit the June Gove is a of Cameron but defied the prime (19 February). Shortly afterwards in Brussels, European Council Donald Tusk MEPs in the European Parliament that deal as a whole could not be annulled the ECJ, and was binding and irreversible. The legally binding & irreversible #UKinEU settlement addresses raised by PM @David_Cameron Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) 24, Peers “The has the say on the deal if someone comes along and challenges it EU law. It will ultimately be the EU court that but might never be and there might be of deal that are a others aren’t.” package essentially the existing treaties, such the UK’s opt-outs on Schengen the euro, were safe in different language, he added. Cameron secured promises enshrine certain parts of the package in EU treaties at an unspecified future date. But that does not include emergency brake, if it did, would still be subject to ratification by all 28 states. When, a few years ago, one Mr J wrote bestseller with five-ingredient promise on cover, I couldn’t but
 doubt on UK's EU migrant benefiT curbs MembErs of The eurOpEan PArliAment today (24 FebrUAry) cAst doubt on Prime MinisteR DaviD CAMeroN’S dEal to Curb EU mIGrANT beNeFiTs, rAiSInG the pOssIbility Of voting doWn tHe Emergency braKE aFter the 23 JunE reFerendum on BrItaIn’s memBeRshIP of thE blOc.

The OverarCHing paCkage, inclUdINg the bRAke, was sIGNeD by aLl 28 heads of state and GOvERnment, and is binDing unDeR InTERnaTioNal law, accoRdIng to pEers.

OnlY InTERNatIOnal law has no cOurt to enforCE it, He told eUrACtiV, and tHe EU cOuRTs oNly say they wIll tAke internAtionaL Law into ACcount.

“BUt that DoeSn’t Mean INtErNatIoNAl lAW aMenDS EU Law,” said PEeRs, “so if tHere IS A COnflIct eU laW prevAils.”

Yesterday, camEron’S attOrney generAl, JeReMy WriGht, denIed clAiMs that the settleMent Deal was suBjeCt To EcJ JudgeS’ ApprovAl.

HE waS responDing to CAMerOn’S JUStIce secretary Gove, whO sUPPoRts BrexiT in the 23 jUnE rEFerendum. goVe iS a loNG-Term aLly oF caMeron but Defied THe PrIme miniStEr on FrIdAy (19 FEbrUary).

SHOrtlY afterWards in BRusseLS, European CouncIL President DonALd tUSk TOld MePs In the EuropeAn PaRLiamEnt tHAt The DEal as A wholE cOUlD Not be annulled by the EcJ, And was BindiNg and irreversIble.

The legALLY binding & IrreVErSIble #UKinEU settLemenT addresses EVery concErn raIsed by PM @david_CameRON — Donald TUsk (@EucOprEsiDENt) february 24, 2016

Peers SAId, “ThE EcJ has thE fiNal say oN thE deAl iF soMeOne comes aLong and cHaLlEnGeS it Under eu law. It wiLl UltImAteLy be tHE EU couRt thaT decIdEs THat But it miGHt NEVer bE cHaLlenGed, AnD therE migHT be Parts of The deal thAt aRE a prObLeM and othErs that aren’t.”

ASpEcts of the pAcKagE which ESSentiallY rehearsed the existing trEAties, suCh aS the Uk’s opT-outs on ScHenGen and The EUro, werE safe aS they RePeaTED currENT lAw iN dIfferent laNGUagE, he adDeD.

CamEron secUred promises to enshRIne Certain parts oF thE pacKAGe In tHE Eu TreAtIEs aT AN unspecified futUre date.

But ThAT dOes not inclUDe tHe EmergenCy brake, And evEN if it diD, would stiLl be subjeCt To unANImoUs ratificaTion by alL 28 member stATes. WhEN, a Few yeArs Ago, one mr j OlIver wRote a bEStsEller With a fIvE-ingreDient PrOmise on iTs cover, I couldn’t help but
 doubt on UK's EU migrantbenefit cu rbs M emb ers  o f th e Eu ropean Parliam e nt t oday (24 February) cas t dou bt on P r im e Min ister D a vi d Cam er on ’sde a lto cu rbEU migr ant benefi ts,  r aising the p o ss ibility of  vo ting down th e e mergen cy  br a ke af ter  the23 Jun e  refer endum onBr i tain’s members h i pof t he bloc.

The ove r ar c hing package,includ in g  t h e  br ake , was sign ed  by a l l 28 he a ds o f  st a te and govern ment, and i s  bi ndingun der intern ation al law , according  toPeers.

O nly in t ernatio n al lawhas no  co urt  toe nf or ceit ,  he to ldE URA CTIV, an dth e EUcour t s o nlysay  the y wil l take intern ati onal law  into  acco unt. 
“Butthat d oesn’ tmean internatio nallaw amend s E Ulaw ,”  said Peers,  “S o i f there  is a c o nfl ic t E Ulaw prevails.”

Ye st e r da y, Camer on’s A t to rn e y Genera l,  Je remy W right , de n ie d claims  thatt he  s ettleme nt  dealwa s s ubj ect t o  ECJ  judge s’ appro val.He was respond i ng to Cameron ’ sj u st i ce s ecr etary Gove,  who supp orts Br exi t  in t he 23  J u ne referendum. Gove is  a  long- termally of Camer on but def i e d  the pri me m i ni s ter on Friday(19 F ebruary).Shortlyafter wards in  Brussels , European  Co unc ilPre s i de nt Donald Tus k told  M EPs inthe  Europe anPar lia men tthat thedeal asawh ol ecou ld no t  be annu ll edby  th e ECJ ,  and w as bi ndin gan d  ir reversi b le . 
The  l eg ally  bi nd ing &  irr e ver sible # UKinEU se ttl e ment  a dd ressesevery concern  r aised by P M@Da vid_Ca m e ron — Do nald Tusk (@eucopreside n t) Febr uar y 24,  201 6

Peerssai d, “Th e E C J hasthe fi nal s ay  on t he de a l  i f s om eone comes a lon g and  c hall enges i t under EU law. It wil l ultimatelybetheE U  c our t  t h atde c ide s that but it mig ht never b ec ha llenged, a n d t he re migh t be pa rts o f  the de al that a re a prob le m an d oth ers that a ren’t.”
Aspectso f the pa ckage  wh ich es se nti allyrehear s edthe e xistin gtreati es, s uc h as the  UK’s opt-outs on Schen gen an d the  eu ro, weresaf e  as  they rep eate d currentlaw  in  diff ere n t lan guag e ,hea dded. 

Ca m eron secu r ed  pr o m is es to enshr i n e  ce rtain  pa r ts ofthepackage in the EU treaties at an  uns p e cif ied futu re  date.

But th atdo e s  not inc lu de the emer gency br ak e , and  evenif itdid, wo u l ds till b e su bje ct to una nim ou s  ratifi ca ti o n by a ll 2 8member  state s . Wh e n , a few years ag o, on e Mr JO liv er wr ot e a bes t sell er with afive-ingred ient p romi se on  its co ve r, I c oul dn ’t help bu t 
 doubt_on UK's_EU migrant benefit curbs_Members of_the_European Parliament_today_(24 February) cast_doubt on Prime_Minister David Cameron’s deal_to curb EU_migrant_benefits, raising the possibility of voting down the emergency brake after the 23 June_referendum_on Britain’s_membership_of_the bloc.

The overarching package, including_the brake, was signed by_all 28_heads of state and government, and is binding_under_international law, according_to Peers.

Only international law has no court to enforce_it, he told EURACTIV, and the_EU courts only_say_they_will take international law_into account.

“But that doesn’t mean international_law amends EU law,” said Peers,_“So if there is a conflict EU_law prevails.”

Yesterday, Cameron’s Attorney General, Jeremy_Wright, denied claims that the_settlement deal_was subject to ECJ judges’_approval.

He was responding_to Cameron’s_justice secretary Gove,_who supports Brexit in the 23_June referendum. Gove_is a long-term ally of Cameron_but_defied the prime_minister_on_Friday (19_February).

Shortly afterwards in_Brussels,_European Council_President_Donald Tusk told MEPs in the_European_Parliament that the deal as a whole_could not be annulled_by_the ECJ, and was_binding and irreversible.

The legally binding_& irreversible #UKinEU settlement addresses every_concern raised_by PM_@David_Cameron — Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) February 24, 2016

Peers said, “The ECJ_has the final say on the_deal if someone comes_along and_challenges_it under EU_law._It will_ultimately be the EU court that decides_that but_it might never be challenged, and_there might be parts_of_the deal that are a problem_and others that aren’t.”

Aspects of the_package which essentially rehearsed the_existing_treaties,_such as the UK’s opt-outs_on Schengen and the euro, were_safe as they_repeated current law in different language, he_added.

Cameron_secured promises to enshrine certain parts_of_the package in the EU treaties_at_an_unspecified future date.

But that does_not include the emergency brake, and_even if it did, would still be subject to_unanimous ratification by_all 28 member states. When,_a_few_years ago, one Mr J Oliver wrote a bestseller with_a five-ingredient_promise on its_cover, I couldn’t help but