This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-supreme-court-ruling-judges-defy-theresa-may-and-hand-power-to-parliament-a7542406.html
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Brexit ruling: Supreme Court judges defy Government and hand power to Parliament | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| The Supreme Court has ruled against Theresa May's Brexit plans and decreed that MPs are entitled to vote on whether to trigger Article 50. | The Supreme Court has ruled against Theresa May's Brexit plans and decreed that MPs are entitled to vote on whether to trigger Article 50. |
| The verdict is a blow for the Prime Minister, albeit one she had expected and had prepared for, after she initially wanted to launch the Brexit process unilaterally. | The verdict is a blow for the Prime Minister, albeit one she had expected and had prepared for, after she initially wanted to launch the Brexit process unilaterally. |
| There is now no doubt that Ms May must seek the permission of MPs, a vote due by the end of March, before invoking Article 50 and starting a two-year countdown to Brexit | There is now no doubt that Ms May must seek the permission of MPs, a vote due by the end of March, before invoking Article 50 and starting a two-year countdown to Brexit |
| Delivering the judgement, Supreme Court President Lord Neuberger said: "By a majority of eight to three, the Supreme Court today rules that the Government cannot trigger Article 50 without an Act of Parliament authorising it to do so." | Delivering the judgement, Supreme Court President Lord Neuberger said: "By a majority of eight to three, the Supreme Court today rules that the Government cannot trigger Article 50 without an Act of Parliament authorising it to do so." |
| Lord Neuberger said the judgment was not about the referendum result or a comment on the merits of leaving or staying in the EU. | Lord Neuberger said the judgment was not about the referendum result or a comment on the merits of leaving or staying in the EU. |
| "The referendum is of great political significance, but the Act of Parliament authorising it did not say what would happen afterwards," Lord Neuberger said, meaning any action taken now must be in keeping with the UK’s constitution. | "The referendum is of great political significance, but the Act of Parliament authorising it did not say what would happen afterwards," Lord Neuberger said, meaning any action taken now must be in keeping with the UK’s constitution. |
| The Independent reported today that ministers were likely to be ready to publish the Bill that MPs will vote on by the end of the week. | |
| After the judgement, Attorney General Jeremy Wright said the Government was "disappointed" by the final decision in its historic battle over who has the right to authorise the start of Brexit. | After the judgement, Attorney General Jeremy Wright said the Government was "disappointed" by the final decision in its historic battle over who has the right to authorise the start of Brexit. |
| He added: "The Government will comply with the judgement of the court and do all that is necessary to implement it." | He added: "The Government will comply with the judgement of the court and do all that is necessary to implement it." |
| It is unclear what would happen legally if MPs vote against such a bill, as much of the constitutional law related to Brexit remains as yet untested, although Jeremy Corbyn has "asked" his MPs to vote not to obstruct it. | It is unclear what would happen legally if MPs vote against such a bill, as much of the constitutional law related to Brexit remains as yet untested, although Jeremy Corbyn has "asked" his MPs to vote not to obstruct it. |
| The judges' ruling is a victory for Gina Miller, a philanthropist and banker, who brought the case against the Government. She was also backed by a crowd-funded group called The Peoples' Challenge, who described themselves as a group of "concerned EU citizens". | The judges' ruling is a victory for Gina Miller, a philanthropist and banker, who brought the case against the Government. She was also backed by a crowd-funded group called The Peoples' Challenge, who described themselves as a group of "concerned EU citizens". |
| Although the Government lost the challenge, the justices unanimously ruled the Government did not need to consult with the devolved powers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. | |
| In a statement released immediately after the ruling, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said his party would not "frustrate the process for invoking Article 50" but would seek to amend the Government. | In a statement released immediately after the ruling, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said his party would not "frustrate the process for invoking Article 50" but would seek to amend the Government. |
| Lord Chancellor Liz Truss, who faced claims she had not spoken out quickly enough in defence of three High Court judges who ruled against the Government on the case last year, delivered a staunch defence of the judiciary following the Supreme Court ruling | |
| In a statement issued minutes after the judgment was handed down, she described the justices as "people of integrity and impartiality". |