Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.

Claim: A no deal Brexit means no more ECJ or ECHR.

Q1: Would a no deal Brexit remove the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice?
A1: Yes, because The European Communities Act 1972 was the piece of legislation that brought the UK into the Europe Union: it gives EU law supremacy over UK national law.

A large amount of EU law effective in the UK currently relies on the 1972 Act.

The Act is repealed by the EU Withdrawal Act 2018

Q2: What is the European Court of Human Rights?
A2: The European Court of Human Rights, judicial organ of the Council of Europe,
examines applications from individuals, but also inter-State applications, lodged by
a State against another State party to the Convention. Currently 47 countries have
undertaken to secure fundamental rights and freedoms, not only to their nationals
but to everyone, even non-Europeans, within their jurisdiction.

Q3: What is the Council of Europe?
A3: The Council of Europe (CoE) is a pan-European organisation of 46 member states, including all 27 member states of the European Union. The United Kingdom was one of the founding members. Set up shortly after the end of the Second World War, the CoE’s core mission is to promote human rights, democracy and the rule of law across the continent.

Q4: Would a no-deal Brexit remove the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights?
A4: The UK will continue to be a member of the European Court of Human Rights after Brexit because its jurisdiction has nothing to do with the EU
user
justification: the answers show The UK will continue to be a member of the European Court of Human Rights after Brexit because its jurisdiction has nothing to do with the EU, but the UK would lose access to the european court of justice. so this is conflicting information. 

verdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'
assistant