{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016560509554140127, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.093023255813954, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Unsuccessful Bid of the British Advocate‐General to Remain on the Bench Despite Brexit

Since the announcement of the referendum result, Brexit has posed a challenge to the EU’s institutions, policies and legal order. The Court of Justice of the European Union has not been an exception. This contribution examines former Advocate-General Eleanor Sharpston’s failed bid to reverse her premature removal from the bench due to the UK’s formal withdrawal from the Union. This case note argues that Eleanor Sharpston indeed should not have been allowed to stay in office until her term expired, critically engages with the Court’s refusal to take the matter within the ambit of its judicial review and reflects on whether these developments meet the standards of judicial independence.