| ▲ | d4ng 11 hours ago |
| Do we have any English lawyers here who can comment on whether it may actually be legal to nationalise Adele (the person) under English law? ChatGPT says it may be possible through an act of parliament, but I’m unsure whether I can trust ChatGPT in this case. |
|
| ▲ | aorist 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yes, Parliament has absolute and unlimited power (except binding future Parliaments, and maybe arguably some matters relating to Scotland): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty_in_t... (not a lawyer) |
| |
| ▲ | noir_lord 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Indeed which is why "taking back sovereignty" as an argument by the pro-Brexit folks was a bit disingenuous (if I'm been kind). It would also require us leaving a whole bunch of international treaties though since "Nationalising a pop singer" kinda breaches a few of them. |
|
|
| ▲ | scj 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Not a Brit, not a lawyer... The promise could be re-interpreted in some funny ways. For example, Count Binface didn't specify when nationalizing Adele would occur. They could create another[0] special case in UK copyright law with a minor twist: Instead of eventually entering the public domain, the copyright of Adele's works would transfer to the UK government which would donate any proceeds to a charity that builds affordable homes. Silly, but it'd mean two promises kept. [0] https://neverlandofficial.com/discover/peter-pan-copyright/ |
|
| ▲ | ZiiS 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Parliament theoretically has unlimited power, practically I think this stops short of reintroducing actual slavery. Lawyers would be busy arguing in international courts; but hopefully 50℅ of the electorate might actually bother to vote. |
| |
| ▲ | enquirewithin an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | International courts? Who cares about those? North Korea? China? Russia? Israel? Gaza? Iran? The USA? What’s are international courts going to do about it? Gaol Britain? Apply sanctions? | |
| ▲ | ZiiS 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | (Obviously the MP for Clacton has the power to talk sturnly to someone with actual power in the councel over the bin collection schedule; the is no plausable way to deliver any of their pledges) | |
| ▲ | classified 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What is 50c/o? That “℅” is not a percent sign. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | saaaaaam 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Lawyer here.[0] Definitely possible.[1] [0] not a lawyer
[1] what does “nationalise” even mean? |
| |
| ▲ | FabCH 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Typically, the government takes over a company. The shareholders or owners may or may not receive compensation. Presumably a normal(?) interpretation would be that the British government uses whatever eminent domain law it has and it takes over Adels copyright on all her songs and gives her whatever the fair market value of the catalog is. But because this is a joke candidate, could be anything. | | | |
| ▲ | red_admiral 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | A joke on the goverment nationalising the railways and the debate around whether we should nationalise water companies. | | |
| ▲ | saaaaaam 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Can water even be nationalised? Do you own the rain that falls on my roof? Can you charge me money if I use it to water my garden? | | |
| ▲ | rsynnott 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Generally water nationalisation means nationalising the companies which supply water to homes and businesses. Not, er, literally nationalising water as in the substance. | | |
| ▲ | saaaaaam 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Your koi pond contains rainwater that ran off my roof, down my gutters and through my flowerbed. You owe me £100. Do not pass go. | | |
| ▲ | NopIdoN 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Thanks for diluting the effluence with your runoff £100 is a bargain |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | d4ng 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Take into public ownership. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | petesergeant 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| A simple bill of attainder would do it, but she'd have recourse to the ECHR to appeal it, which would in practice bind the UK. If we thought she wasn't going to be chill with it, we'd first need to withdraw from the ECHR. As it happens, withdrawing from the the ECHR is a prime Farage objective. |
| |
| ▲ | enquirewithin 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Human rights only apply to those what are willing to defend them. What’s Europe going to do, send in a deal team to extract Adele? |
|
