A legal challenge brought over Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament for five weeks has been rejected by leading judges at the High Court in London.
Rejecting Mrs Miller’s case, Lord Justice Burnett said: “We have concluded that, whilst we should grant permission to apply for judicial review, the claim must be dismissed.”
READ MORE: Politics LIVE: Boris Johnson to visit Scotland after torrid day in effective election campaign
The judges granted permission for the case to go the Supreme Court for an appeal, which will be heard on September 17.
Lord Pannick told the court Mrs Miller was “disappointed” with the result, but that the case will now proceed to the Supreme Court.
Rejecting Mrs Miller’s case, Lord Burnett said: “We have concluded that, whilst we should grant permission to apply for judicial review, the claim must be dismissed.”
Lord Burnett said reasons for the court’s decision would be given in writing as soon as possible.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson renews attacks on Scottish independence campaigners
Speaking outside the Royal Courts of Justice after the ruling, Gina Miller said she was “very disappointed with the judgment”.
She added: “We feel it is absolutely vital that Parliament should be sitting. We are therefore pleased that the judges have given us permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, which we will be doing, and they feel that our case has the merit to be handed up.
READ MORE: Gina Miller's statement in full as judges reject parliament suspension legal challenge
“Today, we stand for everyone. We stand for the future generations and we stand for representative democracy.”
Ms Miller added: “To give up now would be a dereliction of our responsibility. We need to protect our institutions. It is not right that they should be shut down or bullied, especially at this most momentous time in history.
“My legal team and I will not give up our fight for democracy.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel