MPs were informed before the Referendum Act was passed that the referendum was only advisory.

Therefore, if the Government uses the Crown’s prerogative to trigger Article 50, and after two years a withdrawal agreement has not been passed by Parliament, EU treaties will cease to apply and the rights of United Kingdom citizens given to them by the European Communities Act 1972 (freedom of movement, right to vote in European Parliament elections, access to the Court of Justice of the European Union etc) will have been removed.

However, Crown prerogative cannot remove citizens’ rights given to them by an Act of Parliament.

Similarly, if Parliament agrees to leave the EU by triggering Article 50, and after two years it has not passed a withdrawal agreement, EU treaties will cease to apply, and the rights of United Kingdom citizens under EU law, will have been removed by either expressly, or by necessary, implication of an Act of Parliament.

A withdrawal agreement is an international matter, therefore it falls under the Crown’s prerogative. This means the Government is entitled to pick and choose which existing EU rights to preserve. However, the agreement must be ratified by the European Council.

EU laws, such as the working time directive, would be dealt with through a Great Repeal Bill and put into domestic law.

The recent High Court ruling was only concerned with whether Article 50 can be triggered by using the Crown’s prerogative. The judges were not interfering with or concerned by what would follow.

Their decision will not be over ruled by the Supreme Court. I therefore suggest that Nigel Farage and the other “beleavers” take their pitchforks and protest at Parliament, where the majority of MPs have said they will respect the result of the referendum. They should protest until a bill to leave the EU is passed by both the Commons and Lords, as is the will of the majority of citizens of the United Kingdom.

James Conway, Richmond