This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49509712

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Scottish court hears move to stop UK parliament's suspension Scottish court hears move to stop UK parliament's suspension
(about 1 hour later)
A Scottish court hearing which could block the UK parliament's suspension has started. A Scottish court is considering a legal attempt to block the suspension of the UK parliament.
The 75 parliamentarians backing the legal action at the Court of Session in Edinburgh launched it last month. Seventy five parliamentarians are seeking an interim interdict that would halt the move by the government.
They are now seeking an interim interdict that would prevent parliament being suspended pending a full hearing due to start on 6 September. They began legal action at the Court of Session in Edinburgh last month to prevent a Westminster shutdown.
An interim interdict is the Scottish equivalent of an injunction in the English and Welsh legal systems. They are now seeking the Scottish legal equivalent of an injunction to stop parliament being suspended, pending a full hearing on 6 September.
The legal move started before the Queen agreed to the prime minister's request to suspend Parliament for five weeks on 10 September. The Queen has already agreed to the prime minister's request to suspend Parliament for five weeks on 10 September.
Aidan O'Neill QC, representing the parliamentarians, told judge Lord Doherty "sometimes the resolution of legal questions will have political consequences". Boris Johnson has said the Queen's Speech would then take place on 14 October, to outline his "very exciting agenda" of new legislation.
He said there have been a number of examples where an order "signed off" by the Queen had been successfully challenged. Critics, however, say that makes it unlikely MPs would have enough time to pass laws to stop a no-deal Brexit happening on 31 October.
Mr O'Neill went on to argue the suspension of parliament meant a denial of "political accountability" and was unconstitutional. 'Totalitarian state'
The QC said the case came before court as matter of urgency in light of yesterday's announcement. Aidan O'Neill QC, representing the parliamentarians, told judge Lord Doherty: "Powers of the executive are never unlimited or unfettered.
'Exciting agenda' "We do not live in a totalitarian state."
Mr Johnson said a Queen's Speech would take place after the suspension, on 14 October, to outline his "very exciting agenda" of new legislation. Mr O'Neill said there had been a number of examples where an order already "signed off" by the Queen had been successfully challenged.
Critics say that makes it unlikely MPs would have the time required to pass laws to stop a no-deal Brexit happening on 31 October. He went on to argue the suspension of parliament meant a denial of "political accountability" and was unconstitutional.
The QC said the case came before the court as matter of urgency in light of yesterday's announcement.
He argued that a previous case, involving Telegraph owners the Barclay brothers, saw them successfully challenge the validity of Privy Council advice to the Queen.
Mr O'Neill cited a separate case where, he said, it showed there was an "obligation on the sovereign to recall an order of prorogation" if the court was satisfied there had been an "abuse of power".
He said an action raised in the Scottish courts was as valid as one raised in any other UK court, giving the example of a Brexit-related court challenge in Northern Ireland.
After the QC quoted the Claim of Right from 1689 - which asserted the sovereignty of the old Scots parliament - Lord Docherty asked if there was a more recent precedent.
Mr O'Neill said there was none that matched the gravity of the present situation.
The legal challenge launched in the Scottish courts last month is being led by SNP MP Joanna Cherry and Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson, aided by Jo Maugham of the Good Law Project.The legal challenge launched in the Scottish courts last month is being led by SNP MP Joanna Cherry and Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson, aided by Jo Maugham of the Good Law Project.
They want the court to rule that shutting down parliament - known as proroguing - ahead of Brexit would be "both unlawful and unconstitutional" and would have "irreversible legal, constitutional and practical implications for the United Kingdom".They want the court to rule that shutting down parliament - known as proroguing - ahead of Brexit would be "both unlawful and unconstitutional" and would have "irreversible legal, constitutional and practical implications for the United Kingdom".
In a tweet Ms Cherry, who is also a QC, said: "Lord Doherty will hear legal arguments from both sides for around two hours.In a tweet Ms Cherry, who is also a QC, said: "Lord Doherty will hear legal arguments from both sides for around two hours.
"It's possible he could then grant an interim interdict preventing the suspension of Parliament."It's possible he could then grant an interim interdict preventing the suspension of Parliament.
"The UK Gov legal team would immediately move to reclaim, ie appeal.""The UK Gov legal team would immediately move to reclaim, ie appeal."