[naturalman1975]

Article 50 does guarantee they get out as much as anything can. Two years after it is triggered, the United Kingdom leaves the EU unless both it the EU agrees to extend the deadline. That is how it is designed. Worst case scenario, Britain leaves without being able to negotiate a decent exit deal but it still leaves.

Britain cannot just render the treaties invalid. Because the JCEU decides what is and isn't valid, not Britain. Any other approach to exit could be blocked by the JCEU indefinitely - would it be? Maybe not, but there are no guarantees at all on that. The approach you are suggesting could trap Britain inside the EU with no change at all for any negotiation for years.

[Olog-hai]

How? Your repeated insistence that Article 50 gives any advantage to the UK seems to be the proof by assertion fallacy, with all due respect. The article nullifies whatever voting rights the UK possessed within the EU from the time it is invoked, and it gives Brussels all the leverage in negotiations and the UK none.

Rebus sic stantibus is always valid, and even necessary because of how the EU altered the treaties by fiat, among other reasons. Pacta sunt servanda does not apply because the EU broke their promises.

[Olog-hai]

Not to mention, the EU is already excluding the UK from voting rights, as well as conferences and negotiations in which it has an interest, without invocation of Article 50. Yet another breach of the treaty.