GOVERNMENT LOSES SUPREME COURT ARTICLE 50 CASE

Advertisement

Gina Miller

Reuters/Toby Melville

Gina Miller (2nd R) arrives at the Supreme Court to hear the decision of a court ruling on whether Theresa May's government requires parliamentary approval to start the process of leaving the European Union, in Parliament Square, central London, Britain, January 24, 2017.

Advertisement

LONDON - The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday morning that the government must allow Parliament to vote on the triggering of Article 50.

The court's head, Lord Neuberger confirmed that the Supreme Court's judges voted 8-3 to reject the government's appeal, and ruled that it must put the triggering of the article to a vote in Parliament before any formal action can be taken.

In summary, the court said:

"The Supreme Court by a majority of 8 to 3 dismisses the Secretary of State's appeal (Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption and Lord Hodge in the majority with Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath and Lord Hughes dissenting). In a joint judgment of the majority, the Supreme Court holds that an Act of Parliament is required to authorise ministers to give Notice of the decision of the UK to withdraw from the European Union. Each of the dissenting justices gives a separate judgment."

Advertisement

The ruling finally brings to an end a legal battle that has raged for many months since the Brexit vote.

Gina Miller, a London-based investment manager, first launched a legal case arguing that it was unlawful for the prime minister to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty without first securing the approval of Parliament in August.

Miller, represented by Lord Pannick QC, argued that triggering Article 50 without first consulting MPs would mean rights enjoyed by Brits as EU citizens put into law by Parliament being removed without Parliament's permission.

In November, the UK's High Court ruled in Miller's favour and said that parliament must be given a vote on Article 50. That ruling was challenged by the government and taken to the Supreme Court, but has now been upheld by the court's 11 judges.

The verdict was widely expected, but means that the process of triggering Article 50 now becomes a parliamentary matter, adding a further level of scrutiny to the already complex process of Brexit.

Advertisement

The Supreme Court did however, rule that the government does not need to consult the UK's devolved assemblies in Scotland and Northern Ireland on triggering Article 50.

"On the devolution issues, the court unanimously concludes that neither section 1 nor section 75 of the NIA is of assistance in this case, and that the Sewel Convention does not give rise to a legally enforceable obligation," a summary of the court's judgement says.

"Under each of the devolution settlements in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales the devolved legislatures have responsibilities to comply with EU law, and there is a convention ('the Sewel Convention') that the UK Parliament will not normally exercise its right to legislate with regard to devolved matters without the agreement of the devolved legislature," it added.

The case has been hugely polarising. Many supporters of leaving the EU have consistently argued that Miller and others are trying to undermine the will of the British people by striking down Brexit. This has led to Miller receiving near constant threats, and after the initial High Court ruling, led to a spate of newspaper headlines calling the High Court's judges "Enemies of the People."

Those who brought the case have consistently argued that it is not about preventing Brexit, but rather ensuring parliamentary sovereignty is respected.

Advertisement

While this case comes to an end on Tuesday, a new Brexit legal battle will commence on Friday, when the Irish Court will begin to deliberate whether Article 50 can be revoked once triggered. The case was launched by barrister Jo Maugham, who told Business Insider that if the Article 50 process can be reversed then it would give the public the chance to decline a Brexit deal. Maugham also believes there is evidence to suggest that Article 50 has already been triggered.

This is a breaking story and will be frequently updated.

NOW WATCH: Watch President Obama's full farewell speech