united-kingdom constitutional-law
What provisions existed in UK law for handling a tied Brexit vote?
<p>The UK left the European Union because of a public referendum where <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_vote_in_favour_of_Brexit#:%7E:text=Factors%20included%20sovereignty%2C%20immigration%2C%20the,of%20leaving%20the%20European%20Union." rel="nofollow noreferrer">51.8% of the votes were in favour in leaving the EU</a>.</p>
<p>Suppose it had resulted in an tie, i.e. 50% in favour of leaving the EU, 50% against leaving the EU.</p>
<p>What legal framework existed at the time for handling such a tie? Would the government have been required to run the referendum a second time? Would they have settled it with a coin flip? Or was there no law about this possibility at all?</p>

<p>You can see the whole regulations on <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/41/contents" rel="noreferrer">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>.</p>
<p>It is a referendum. There does not need to be a &quot;winner&quot;. A referendum is meant to understand what the general populace <em>wants</em>. And &quot;they are split exactly 50/50 between X and Y&quot; is a valid result in that frame.</p>
<p>The point that made this referendum special was that the ruling party had promised, that they would actually <em>do</em> what the referendums outcome would suggest, even if they were <em>not</em> legally bound by it and were not even in favor of it as a political party.</p>
<p>So what the ruling party would have done when confronted by an absolute exact tie (not only percentages, but actual votes) is anybodies guess. I don't think anybody had a backup plan for what happens if the 33,577,342 votes came out <em>exactly</em> 16,788,671 to 16,788,671. The chance of that... was not real. You prepare for that about as much as for an alien invasion on election day.</p>
