Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
The prorogation of parliament was justified by Boris Johnson as space that would allow a Queen’s Speech to outline the new PM’s policies moving forward. However, with the Brexit deadline (31 October) on the horizon, the Supreme Court says the decision to prorogue parliament and cease current duties leading up to Brexit was unlawful.
The Supreme Court's president, Lady Hale said: "The effect on the fundamentals of our democracy was extreme.”
"The decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification," she added, according to the BBC.
Hale concluded that the PM’s advice to Her Majesty was “unlawful, void and of no effect.”
"Boris Johnson's position is untenable and he should have the guts to resign" says SNP spokesperson Joanna Cherry.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Prime Minister's suspension of parliament was unlawful.
Follow live reaction here: https://t.co/aY7Nzaa1tQ pic.twitter.com/TA8PnLIIK8
— Sky News (@SkyNews) September 24, 2019
Lawyer Monthly has since heard from Elaine Motion, Executive Chairman of Balfour+Manson, the firm that represents Joanna Cherry MP and all other petitioners in the case initially brought at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.
She said: “The unanimous decision of the UK Supreme Court today, to cut down the prorogation, essentially reconfirms the position taken by the Court of Session Inner House. That means that the clock is rewound to 27 August and Parliament is not suspended. It is as if the suspension never occurred.
"It is a huge vindication for the Parliamentarians who led the way with the challenge in Scotland and an even more significant reinforcement of the critical importance of the Rule of Law and the Sovereignty of Parliament. Hopefully Parliament can now get back to its essential work."
