Huge court case today at The Court of Session in Edinburgh.

*Seventy six* MPs are suing the Prime Minister in an attempt to stop a no-deal Brexit through parliament (Westminster) being suspended.

Regardless of the case outcome there could be big implications. The case will likely take weeks to conclude.

Due to prorogation of the Westminster parliament yesterday, by PM Boris Johnson, this court case has now been brought forward to 12 noon today.

It is possible the judge could grant an interim interdict *preventing the suspension of parliament*.

Wait for the fireworks!

Show thread

Court rises, returns to-morrow at 10am.

I should also mention there are also court cases in: N. Ireland (that Brexit breaks the Good Friday Agreement), and England & Wales by Gina Miller.

There is also a request to trigger an EU rule of law investigation into Johnson's proroguing of parliament, which would be a lovely irony. A suggestion also that EU could suspend no-deal for Scotland & N. Ireland while investigation progresses. 😃

Show thread

The Court of Session has refused an interim interdict (shame, that would've been fun), full hearing to go ahead Sept 3rd.

But wait...

The petitioners are seeking an affidavit, sworn on oath by PM Boris Johnson, the reasons for the prorogation of parliament.


Show thread

I'm now seeing reports that the Lord Advocate (Scotland's chief legal officer & govt adviser) wants to intervene in the case. He will be supporting the petitioners (Cherry et al) and will do so without delaying the case. The case is due to resume to-morrow. This is extraordinary, but I have no idea what it means.

Of course, to-morrow is also the day when a Vote of No Confidence may be started in Boris Johnson's govt. Busy day!

Show thread

[Note to The Court of Session: can you please refrain from hearing important constitutional cases while I am preparing and eating lunch. Thank you.]

Show thread

Ooh, this is meaty.

Documents provided to the court show PM Johnson was already discussing prorogation of the Westminster parliament on August 15th.

Not only does this mean the UK govt counsel was misleading the court, it also makes out PM Johnson as a liar.


Show thread

The petitioners case centres on the 1689 Claim of Right: a legally limited constitution, an executive that is justiciable and a monarchy whose powers are limited.

Show thread

The govt's counsel is arguing it would be odd it the queen were subject (sic) to different legal interpretations in England & Scotland. Aha...

Thought by me: according to reports, the queen agreed to the proroguing of parliament while she was at Balmoral. Therefore by jurisdiction she should be judged according to Scots law.

Show thread

Court has risen. Judge will consider verdict overnight. Back to-morrow at 10am.

Show thread


Judge has ruled that the court can not intervene on prerogative power.

The petitioners believe the judge has erred in law. An immediate appeal is being made. This case has not ended. Next stage will be The Court of Appeal and if not successful then the European Court of Justice.

Show thread

Oh, the appeal is set for this afternoon.

Gosh, courts can move fast when they want.

Show thread

I go away from my keyboard for 45 minutes to prepare lunch, during which time all Hell breaks loose.

Back shortly, once I have assimilated what has happened.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!