Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
You;d like to think that was true, but I think that both the rulings in the English and Scottish courts were correct, even inf they, supposedly, came to different conclusions.

The first asked whether Parliament had the right to extend prorogation for purely political reasons, to which the high Court said yes.
The scottish court was asked if the Prime minister could have been honest in his dealings with the queen, to which it said no.

You see, it really does depend on how you ask your question and the scottish petitioners were more careful.

Tht said, the Scottish ruling has to be challenged because nobody actually knows what was said by the Prime minister to the Queen. So, I suspect that the Supreme court will uphold the decision in the English court and overturn that of the Scottish. Sadly, the law is right in that regard.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Tue Sep 17th, 2019 at 11:16:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What I don't get is what happens if the Scottish court decides it is illegal, and the English court decides it is legal. In that case does only the English part of parliament get prorogued? While the Scottish members remain seated?

And if so, can the Scottish members pass laws and regulations and rulings that apply across all of GB?

Very confusing.

by asdf on Tue Sep 17th, 2019 at 04:34:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Supreme Court of Great Britain

Replaced the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary or Law Lords ... pretty archaic for a Parliamentary democracy ... that's why Boris Johnson fits so well as Brexit PM. 😡

by Oui on Tue Sep 17th, 2019 at 05:34:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series