Uk parliament suspension not matter for judges lawyer

The UK Parliament suspension controversy!

In September 2019, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson asked Queen Elizabeth II to prorogue (suspend) Parliament, sparking a constitutional crisis. The move was seen as an attempt to limit the time available for MPs to debate and vote on Brexit-related legislation.

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ultimately ruled that the suspension was unlawful and "void ab initio" (void from the beginning). This means that the suspension was never valid in the first place.

Here's a brief summary of the key points:

  1. The case: The Scottish government, led by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, brought a court case against the UK government, arguing that the suspension was unlawful and an attempt to prevent Parliament from holding the government accountable.
  2. The judges: The case was heard by the UK Supreme Court, which is the highest court in the UK. The judges were:
    • President of the Supreme Court, Lady Hale
    • Lord Reed
    • Lord Kerr
    • Lord Wilson
    • Lord Hodge
    • Lord Lloyd-Jones
    • Lady Arden
  3. The ruling: On September 24, 2019, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment, ruling that the suspension was unlawful and "void ab initio". The court found that the Prime Minister had acted in bad faith and that the suspension was intended to prevent Parliament from holding the government accountable.
  4. The implications: The ruling meant that the suspension was never valid, and Parliament was effectively recalled. The court's decision was seen as a significant blow to the Prime Minister's authority and a victory for the opposition parties.

The lawyer involved in the case was:

The judges' decision was widely reported and sparked a significant political backlash, with many arguing that the Prime Minister had acted unconstitutionally. The controversy ultimately contributed to the UK's ongoing Brexit crisis and the country's ongoing political instability.