R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland

R (Miller) v The Prime Minister Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland
Court	Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
Full case name	R (on the application of Miller) v The Prime Minister Cherry and others v Advocate General for Scotland
Argued	17–19 September 2019
Decided	24 September 2019
Neutral citation	2019 UKSC 41
Case history
Prior history	[2019] EWHC 2381 (QB) [2019] CSIH 49
Holding
The use of the prerogative power of prorogation is justiciable. The Prime Minister's advice to the Queen to prorogue Parliament, and the resulting Order in Council, were unlawful because they had "the effect of frustrating or preventing, without reasonable justification, the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions as a legislature and as the body responsible for the supervision of the executive". The order was void, and Parliament was not legally prorogued.
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting	Hale, Reed, Kerr, Wilson, Carnwath, Hodge, Black, Lloyd-Jones, Arden, Kitchin, Sales
Case opinions
Majority	Unanimous
Area of law
United Kingdom constitutional law parliamentary sovereignty royal prerogative

This article is part of a series about Boris Johnson
Political positions Electoral history Public image MP for Uxbridge and South Ruislip MP for Henley Editor of The Spectator Mayor of London Mayoralty 2008 mayoral election London Britannia Airport Santander Cycles New Routemaster 2011 riots 2012 mayoral election London Cable Car 2012 Summer Olympics 2012 Summer Paralympics Garden Bridge European Union referendum Brexit causes Vote Leave EU referendum aftermath 2016 leadership election Foreign Secretary Foreign Office under Boris Johnson Yemen intervention Zaghari-Ratcliffe case 2018 Salisbury attack Chequers plan Party leadership campaigns 2019 election polling endorsements reactions Darroch resignation 2022 explored candidacy endorsements Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Premiership International trips Minister for the Union First ministry and term First ministry Suspension of rebel MPs Brexit Benn Act 2019 prorogation Supreme Court case Brexit deal renegotiation revised deal 2019 general election Get Brexit Done Second ministry and term Second ministry departures 2020 reshuffle 2021 reshuffle EU Withdrawal Agreement Northern Ireland Protocol EU trade negotiation cooperation agreement COVID-19 pandemic government response lockdown vaccinations contracts contract controversies Dominic Cummings scandal Partygate Privileges Committee investigation Death and funeral of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh Evacuations from Afghanistan Levelling up COP26 Refurb controversy Owen Paterson scandal Rwanda asylum plan Proposed NI increase Russian invasion of Ukraine economic impact British aid to Ukraine Cost of living crisis Conservative Party confidence vote Chris Pincher scandal Government crisis July 2022 reshuffle leadership election House of Commons confidence vote Resignation Honours Bibliography Friends, Voters, Countrymen Seventy-Two Virgins The Dream of Rome The Churchill Factor In popular culture When Boris Met Dave Brexit: The Uncivil War This England Boris Johnson Is a Fucking Cunt Boris Johnson Is Still a Fucking Cunt Boris: The Rise of Boris Johnson Boris v. Ken
v t e

R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland ([2019] UKSC 41), also known as Miller II and Miller/Cherry, were joint landmark constitutional law cases on the limits of the power of royal prerogative to prorogue the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Argued before the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in September 2019, the case concerned whether the advice given by the prime minister, Boris Johnson, to Queen Elizabeth II that Parliament should be prorogued in the prelude to the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union was lawful.

On 24 September 2019, in a unanimous decision by eleven justices, the court found that the matter was justiciable, and that Johnson's advice was unlawful; this upheld the ruling of the Inner House of the Court of Session in Cherry, and overturned the High Court of Justice's ruling in Miller. As a result, the Order in Council permitting the prorogation was null and of no effect and Parliament had, in fact, not been prorogued.