header-logo header-logo

24 September 2019 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7857 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Parliament was not prorogued

Michael Zander QC assesses the Supreme Court’s remarkable decision

The decision of the Supreme Court is remarkable for many reasons (R (on the application of Miller) v The Prime Minister; Cherry and ors v Advocate General for Scotland [2019] UKSC 41, [2019] All ER (D) 61 (Sep)). One is that it was produced in such a short time. Another, of immense importance, is that it is unanimous. A third is that it rejects the reasoning of the Divisional Court’s unanimous decision given by the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls and the President that the issue was not justiciable.

The two most important paragraphs of this historic judgment are perhaps these:

‘It is their [the courts] particular responsibility to determine the legal limits of the powers conferred on each branch of government and to decide whether any exercise of power has transgressed those limits. The courts cannot shirk that responsibility merely on the ground that the question raised is political in tone or context.’ ([39])

‘[A] decision to prorogue Parliament (or to advise the monarch to prorogue

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll