Brexit: High Court rejects challenge to Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament

Campaigner Gina Miller says she will appeal the ruling in the Supreme Court

A legal challenge to Boris Johnson’s five-week suspension of parliament by campaigner and businesswoman Gina Miller has been rejected by the High Court.

Ms Miller – whose case was backed by former prime minister Sir John Major – immediately announced she will appeal the ruling at the Supreme Court on 17 September.

Lawyers for Ms Miller argued that the prime minister’s advice to the Queen to shut the doors of Westminster in the run-up to the expected date of Brexit on 31 October was an “unlawful abuse of power”.

But a panel of three senior judges ruled that the claim must be dismissed.

The ruling comes days after Mr Johnson fought off a similar legal action in the Scottish courts.

Speaking outside the court, Ms Miller said: “We are very disappointed with the judgment today.

“We feel strongly that parliamentary sovereignty is fundamental to the stability and future of our country and is therefore worth fighting to defend. As our politics becomes more chaotic on a daily basis, the more vital it is that parliament is sitting.”

She added: “Today we stood up for everyone – we stood up for future generations, we stood up for our representative democracy, and tried to stop those who would wreck our constitution.

Gina Miller: ‘As our politics becomes more chaotic on a daily basis, the more vital it is that parliament is sitting’

“To give up now would be a dereliction of our responsibility to help protect our elected representatives – our eyes and ears that sit in Westminster – who protect our rights and give each of us a voice.

“It is not right that they should be bullied or shut down – especially at this most momentous of times in the history of our United Kingdom.”

During the hearing, Lord Pannick QC, representing Ms Miller, told the judges: “The prime minister’s decision to prorogue parliament is contrary to constitutional principle and constitutes an abuse of power.”

He argued: “There is no justification for closing parliament in this way and, accordingly, it represents an unjustified undermining of parliamentary sovereignty which is the bedrock of our constitution.

But Sir James Eadie, on behalf of Mr Johnson, said: “The exercise of this prerogative power is intrinsically one of high policy and politics, not law.”

Arguing that the claim was “academic”, he pointed out that parliament will sit again from 14 October “and may consider any matter it chooses” in the final 17 days before the Brexit deadline.

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.”

The three judges are expected to give their reasons for dismissing the case in writing next week.

A Downing Street spokesperson said: “We welcome the court’s decision and we hope that those seeking to use the judiciary to frustrate the government take note of it and of the Court of Session ruling earlier this week and withdraw their cases.”