Gina Miller and Sir John Major fail to stop Boris shutting down Parliament as top judges reject their case

REMAINER lawyer Gina Miller and Sir John Major have failed to stop Boris Johnson shutting down Parliament as top judges reject their case.

Miller’s legal team told the High Court that the PM's decision to stop MPs sitting for five weeks was an “exceptional” length of time and “unlawful abuse of power”.

BORIS BOOST

But after hearing submissions on Thursday, Lord Justice Burnett ruled this morning that this was not the case.

Rejecting Mrs Miller's argument, he said: "We have concluded that, whilst we should grant permission to apply for judicial review, the claim must be dismissed."

The PM previously warned the case could cause "catastrophic damage" to politics if it succeeded in stopping Brexit.

We have concluded that, whilst we should grant permission to apply for judicial review, the claim must be dismissed.

Lord Justice Burnett

Today's ruling is a boost to Boris after a galling week in Westminster that saw him lose two votes and his brother Jo Johnson quit as an MP.

But it is the second legal challenge he has seen off in the court in five days, after a separate legal bid against proroguing failed on Monday when a judge ruled it was "political territory" and that courts could not rule on it.

A cross-party group of 75 MPs and campaigners had taken their case to the Court of Session in Scotland.

But top judge Lord Doherty ruled: "Accountability for the advice is to Parliament and ultimately the electorate and not to the courts. In my opinion, there has been no contravention of the rule of law."

MILLER COURT BID

Yesterday, Lord Pannick QC, representing Ms Miller, told the judges: "The prorogation is timed to occur at a period of acute political crisis, with the UK scheduled to leave the European Union on 31 October 2019 but with no agreement having been concluded between the UK and the EU on the terms of its withdrawal.

"The claimant submits that the effect of the prorogation, when time is of the essence in the lead-up to the 31 October 2019 deadline, has the effect of seriously impeding the exercise of Parliament's functions, as the Prime Minister well knew.

The Prime Minister's decision to prorogue Parliament is contrary to constitutional principle and constitutes an abuse of power.

Lord Pannick

"There is no justification for closing Parliament in this way and, accordingly, it represents an unjustified undermining of parliamentary sovereignty which is the bedrock of our constitution."

He added: "Our case is that the Prime Minister's advice to Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament for a period of five weeks is an unlawful abuse of power."

Lord Pannick told the Lord Chief Justice: "The Prime Minister's decision to prorogue Parliament is contrary to constitutional principle and constitutes an abuse of power."

The hearing in London comes the day after Mr Johnson fought off another Remainer court challenge action in Scotland.

A judge at the Court of Session in Edinburgh ruled on Wednesday that the planned prorogation was lawful - that decision is now being appealed against.

Whatever the outcome of the challenges against the decision to prorogue Parliament, it is likely that the dispute will end up at the UK's highest court.

A spokeswoman for the Supreme Court in London has said "should any parties choose to appeal to the UK Supreme Court following the prorogation appeal hearings in the lower courts", the court has set aside September 17 "as a date to hear such an appeal".

We pay for your stories! Do you have a story for The Sun Online news team? Email us at tips@the-sun.co.uk or call 0207 782 4368 . You can WhatsApp us on 07810 791 502. We pay for videos too. Click here to upload yours.