[2019] UKSC 41

UKSC 2019/0192
R (on the application of Miller) (Appellant) v The Prime Minister (Respondent)
On appeal from the QBD Administrative Court (England and Wales) (Leapfrog)

On 28 August 2019, on the advice of the Prime Minister, Her Majesty the Queen made an Order in Council providing that Parliament be prorogued on a day no earlier than 9 September 2019 and no later than 12 September 2019, until Monday 14 October 2019. The Prime Minister issued a press release stating that the purpose of the prorogation was to introduce a new legislative programme to Parliament at a Queen’s Speech to take place on 14 October 2019. Parliament was subsequently prorogued on 9 September 2019. The appellant issued proceedings for judicial review on the grounds that the Prime Minister’s decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was an abuse of power and beyond the proper constitutional limits of the common law prerogative of prorogation.
The issues are:
Whether the decision of the Prime Minister to advise Her Majesty the Queen to prorogue Parliament is justiciable in the courts; and
If the decision is justiciable and the appeal is not academic, whether that advice was lawful.

UKSC 2019/0193
Cherry and others (Respondents) v Advocate General for Scotland (Appellant) (Scotland)
On appeal from the Court of Session (Scotland)

The Inner House held that the issue of prorogation was, in the circumstances, justiciable. When the reasons for the prorogation that has occurred were considered they demonstrated that the true reason for the prorogation was to reduce the time for Parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit and thus prevent Parliament from performing its central role in scrutinising Government action.
The issue(s) are:
Whether the challenge to the decision of the Prime Minister to advise Her Majesty the Queen to prorogue Parliament is justiciable in the courts;
Whether the appeal is in any event academic, given Parliamentary sittings before the UK’s exit from the EU on 31 October 2019; and
If the appeal is justiciable, whether the Prime Minister’s advice was lawful.