A LEGAL challenge in a bid to force Boris Johnson to seek an extension to Article 50 has been filed in the Scottish courts.
Lodged at the Court of Session earlier today, the litigation is being led by the SNP’s Joanna Cherry and Jo Maugham QC.
The campaigners are seeking a judgment from the second tier of the court – its Inner House – that would force the Prime Minister to comply with the new law passed on Monday that will prevent the UK from leaving the EU without a deal.
The litigation is being funded by Dale Vince, a millionaire businessman and political donor who founded the green energy company Ecotricity.
On Monday, the House of Commons passed a law which will attempt to stop Johnson’s government from dragging the UK off a No-Deal cliff-edge. It requires the Prime Minister to request an extension to Article 50 until January.
READ MORE: Scottish court ruling threatens to help end Boris Johnson’s reign
READ MORE: Why Scottish judges saw through the Tory lie and unleashed chaos
READ MORE: Boris Johnson urged to apologise for No 10 slur about Scots judges
Johnson has continually said he would not ask for an extension, recently saying he’d rather be “dead in a ditch” than request one.
And after leading the Cherry Case, which saw three Scottish judges rule yesterday that Johnson suspended Parliament unlawfully, the SNP MP is now leading a bid that could see the Court of Session send an Article 50 extension letter on the Prime Minister’s behalf if he refuses to do so.
Known as a nobile officium, the special jurisdiction of the Inner House of the Court of Session could see it send any letter that Johnson refuses to send himself.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel