Brexit legal challenge: Theresa May needs parliamentary approval to trigger Article 50, High Court rules – as it happened
Historic case hands Parliament opportunity to challenge, or even delay, the process of leaving the European Union
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The High Court has ruled on whether Theresa May cannot bypass Parliament when she triggers Britain’s exit from the European Union.
Here are the latest updates:
- The Government has admitted that an Act of Parliament is likely to be needed to trigger Article 50, delaying Brexit
- Fate of Article 50 now rests with the Supreme Court
- Majority now want to remain in EU, poll finds
- Is this the end of Brexit?
- Bookies slash odds on Brexit not happening
- Theresa May must get approval to trigger Article 50
- What does the ruling mean?
- How the decision affected the pound
- European media brand ruling 'humiliation' for Theresa May
Campaigners have won their High Court battle over Theresa May's decision to use the royal prerogative in her Brexit strategy.
In one of the most important constitutional cases in generations, three senior judges ruled the Prime Minister does not have power to use the prerogative to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to start the UK's exit from the European Union - without the prior authority of Parliament.
The ruling against the Government was made by Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas, sitting with two other senior judges in London.
The Government has been given the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court.
Judgment: R (Miller) -V- Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union
Judgment: R (Miller) -V- Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union
Unless overturned on appeal at the Supreme Court, the ruling threatens to plunge the Government's plans for Brexit into disarray as the process will have to be subject to full parliamentary control.
Government lawyers had argued that prerogative powers were a legitimate way to give effect "to the will of the people" who voted by a clear majority to leave the European Union in the June referendum.
But the Lord Chief Justice declared: "The Government does not have power under the Crown's prerogative to give notice pursuant to Article 50 for the UK to withdraw from the European Union."
The Government has been given the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court but made no immediate announcement about whether it will.
Campaigners are celebrating victory in the legal battle against Theresa May's decision to use the royal prerogative in her Brexit strategy.
They are now demanding she sets out her negotiating strategy to MPs.
The Liberal Democrats have reacted to the High Court's decision:
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said:
This ruling underlines the need for the government to bring its negotiating terms to parliament without delay. Labour respects the decision of the British people to leave the European Union.
But there must be transparency and accountability to parliament on the terms of Brexit. Labour will be pressing the case for a Brexit that works for Britain, putting jobs, living standards and the economy first.
Green Party co-leader Caroline Lucas said the ruling meant Mrs May and her Cabinet would not have "total control" over Britain's future.
"We welcome this ruling, which shows that ministers do not have the power to trigger Article 50 without consulting Parliament," she said.
"Parliament must have the opportunity to debate and vote on triggering Article 50, rather than a group of ministers at the top table having total control over this country's future place in the world.
"The Green Party will continue to fight to protect free movement, workers' rights and the vital environmental protections we currently have as part of the EU."
Labour MP and constitutional expert Graham Allen said the Supreme Court now faces "its first historic test" in hearing the Government's appeal against the ruling.
He said: "It is the beginning of defining more clearly and honestly a separation of powers in the UK, which has hitherto been shrouded in mystery.
"Parliament can no longer be the poodle of Government of any political complexion.
"On fundamental matters of our democracy, Parliament must not only be consulted but, as on Article 50, legislate.
"This is not to overturn the decision in principle by the British people but to give it full life.
"I welcome the decision of the High Court and now hope the Supreme Court upholds the sovereignty of Parliament which was such a core part of the reason to leave the EU."
David Greene, acting for Deir Dos Santos, one of the applicants in the legal challenge, said:
This is a victory not just for the brave individuals that brought this claim but, more importantly, for Parliamentary democracy and the rule of law. This is a victory for democracy over the feudal institution of Royal Prerogative.
The Government has to accept the constitutional reality that Parliament must have early involvement in the process. It shows political leaders are not above the law and that Brexit must follow due process.
Involving Parliament at the so-called Great Repeal Bill stage was a sop dragged out of the Government during this case but that is not enough.
Today some of England's most senior judges have ruled that Parliament must be involved in this critical decision for the nation.
Our Parliamentary democracy has been reaffirmed and now very much needs to show it is alive and kicking.
Former Liberal Democrat leader Lord (Menzies) Campbell of Pittenweem said the ruling was a "slap in the face" for Ms May.
"This is a clear illustration of the well-known legal principle that no matter how high you are, the law is above you," he said.
"It is a slap in the face for the Government. It shows the dangers of playing ducks and drakes with the constitution and particularly the sovereignty of Parliament."
Former education secretary Nicky Morgan said she hoped the chances of the Government hitting Mrs May's Article 50 deadline were "quite strong".
She told the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme: "The triggering of Article 50 is a big first step but I think people will want progress made on that.
"I think it's important the Government shows there is progress and I see no reason why, actually, unless we end up with some lengthy legal proceedings tying things up, the Government doesn't take charge of this and say we are going to have a piece of very simple legislation.
"Members of Parliament will be mindful of how their constituents voted on 23 June."
Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott referenced Theresa May's "Brexit means Brexit" catchphrase in reacting to the ruling.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments