The Supreme Court’s judgment in Cherry/Miller (No 2) that the prorogation of Parliament was unlawful, null and of no effect was a bold move as a matter of public law. It represents a constitutional court willing to assert its authority as guardian of the constitution. But although potentially of long-term constitutional moment, it changes very little with regard to the fundamental constitutional and political issue of Britain’s membership of the European Union.</p
In this new paper for Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project, Professor Martin Loughlin of the LSE...
Today’s landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the UK has sent yet more shock waves through the B...
This article considers the recent prorogation litigation, which is encompassed of two legal actions,...
On 24 September 2019, just two weeks after Parliament had been controversially prorogued by Prime Mi...
Examines the grounds on which the Prime Minister's prorogation of Parliament was found unlawful, and...
The UK Supreme Court is about to decide the fate of the UK Government’s decision to prorogue Parliam...
Joelle Grogan comments on the UK Supreme Court’s Cherry/Miller No 2 judgment on the government’s att...
Members and supporters of the British government say that the only constitutionally legitimate cours...
The Supreme Court’s 8:3 ruling against the government is measured and restrained in tone – but it is...
In R (Miller) v Prime Minister (No. 2) the UKSC invalidated an attempted prorogation of Parliament, ...
The UK Supreme Court held that Parliament had been unlawfully prorogued in September 2019. This pape...
The Miller case was of great interest to the legal and political establishment. But was it a landmar...
The Supreme Court in Miller upheld the Divisional Court, and decided that the government could not t...
Over the last few decades, the UK has experienced a profound – if quiet – constitutional transformat...
Much was at stake in the LM / Deficiencies decision. The Court of Justice was called to strike a com...
In this new paper for Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project, Professor Martin Loughlin of the LSE...
Today’s landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the UK has sent yet more shock waves through the B...
This article considers the recent prorogation litigation, which is encompassed of two legal actions,...
On 24 September 2019, just two weeks after Parliament had been controversially prorogued by Prime Mi...
Examines the grounds on which the Prime Minister's prorogation of Parliament was found unlawful, and...
The UK Supreme Court is about to decide the fate of the UK Government’s decision to prorogue Parliam...
Joelle Grogan comments on the UK Supreme Court’s Cherry/Miller No 2 judgment on the government’s att...
Members and supporters of the British government say that the only constitutionally legitimate cours...
The Supreme Court’s 8:3 ruling against the government is measured and restrained in tone – but it is...
In R (Miller) v Prime Minister (No. 2) the UKSC invalidated an attempted prorogation of Parliament, ...
The UK Supreme Court held that Parliament had been unlawfully prorogued in September 2019. This pape...
The Miller case was of great interest to the legal and political establishment. But was it a landmar...
The Supreme Court in Miller upheld the Divisional Court, and decided that the government could not t...
Over the last few decades, the UK has experienced a profound – if quiet – constitutional transformat...
Much was at stake in the LM / Deficiencies decision. The Court of Justice was called to strike a com...
In this new paper for Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project, Professor Martin Loughlin of the LSE...
Today’s landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the UK has sent yet more shock waves through the B...
This article considers the recent prorogation litigation, which is encompassed of two legal actions,...