After a case brought by Miller that set a constitutional precedent and upheld parliamentary sovereignty, the supreme court ruled by a majority of eight justices to three in January 2017 that MPs and peers must give their consent before the government could trigger article 50 and formally initiate Brexit.
Last week the former Tory prime minister Sir John Major said he would be willing to go to court to seek a judicial review to stop Johnson proroguing parliament.
“I served in parliament for over 20 years. I’m very proud to have done so,” said Major. “I have huge admiration for our parliamentary traditions.
“I’m not going to stand by and see them disregarded in this fashion. It is utterly, utterly and completely the wrong way to proceed.”
He added: “Let’s strip away the jargon of proroguing and contemplate what this actually means. What it means is that a prime minister – prime minister Johnson, presumably – because he cannot persuade parliament to agree with his policy, will close down parliament so that he can bypass it until his policy comes into operation.
“Now, nobody has done that since the Stuart era and it didn’t end well. And it shouldn’t end well.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
