Show Summary Details
Essential Cases: Public Law

Essential Cases: Public Law (3rd edn)

Thomas E. Webb
Page of

Printed from Oxford Law Trove. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 20 May 2022

R (on the application of Miller and Cherry) v Prime Minister and Advocate General for Scotland [2019] UKSC 41, Supreme Courtlocked

R (on the application of Miller and Cherry) v Prime Minister and Advocate General for Scotland [2019] UKSC 41, Supreme Courtlocked

  • Thomas E. WebbThomas E. WebbLecturer in Law, Lancaster University

Abstract

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of Miller and Cherry) v Prime Minister and Advocate General for Scotland [2019] UKSC 41, UK Supreme Court. This case concerned whether the government could advise the Queen to prorogue Parliament for a protracted period of time (c. five weeks), when significant constitutional changes were being debated (the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union). The Supreme Court considered the legality of the prorogation on the basis of two constitutional principles—parliamentary sovereignty and government accountability to Parliament. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

You do not currently have access to this chapter

Sign in

Please sign in to access the full content.

Subscribe

Access to the full content requires a subscription