Court rejects attempt to force Prime Minister to seek Brexit extension

An attempt to secure a court ruling to force the Prime Minister to request a Brexit extension to prevent the UK leaving the EU without a deal has been rejected by the Court of Session.

The case related to legislation known as the Benn Act which passed in the House of Commons last month that means Boris Johnson will have to seek an extension if the government cannot agree a deal with the EU by 19 October.

The court today ruled that there was no need to force Johnson to obey that law, because his lawyers had already made it clear that he does intend to do so.

Brought by SNP MP Joanna Cherry and lawyer Jolyon Maugham QC along with business Dale Vince, the case attempted to get the court to compel Johnson to comply with the law as well as asking the court to agree to sign and send a Brexit extension letter if Johnson refused to do it.

In his legal opinion before the court’s outer chamber, judge Lord Pentland said it was “neither necessary nor appropriate” to compel the Prime Minister to ask for an extension because there is now “no doubt” that he “accepts that he must comply… and has affirmed that he intends to do so."

Lord Pentland contined: "I approach matters on the basis that it would be destructive of one of the core principles of constitutional propriety and of the mutual trust that is the bedrock of the relationship between the court and the crown for the prime minister or the government to renege on what they have assured the court that the prime minister intends to do".

The case was jointly brought SNP MP Joanna Cherry, Jolyon Maugham QC and was backed by the businessman Dale Vince.

They wanted to get a ruling that would allow the court to sign and send a Brexit extension letter if the Prime Minister refuses.

The court saw documents submitted by the UK Government’s lawyers on Friday said that Johnson accepts that he must obey the law.

The submission said that the Prime Minister “is subject to the public law principle that he cannot frustrate its purpose or the purpose of its provisions. Thus he cannot act so as to prevent the letter requesting the specified extension in the act from being sent.”

However, this legal statement contradicts the Prime Minister’s publicly stated position that he intends to leave the EU on 31 October “with or without a deal” and would “rather be dead in a ditch” than seek an extension.

On the same day as the court ruling, Johnson told French president Emmanuel Macron that the EU "should not be lured into the mistaken belief” that the UK will still be a member on 1 November.

Commenting on the decision, Maugham Tweeted: “In short, we’ve lost.”

He continued: “As we have extracted promises from the Govt, the question whether this loss matters depends on whether you think I am right or the Court is right.

“But, on any view, there are now risks of an unlawful Brexit that would not, had the decision gone the other way, have existed.”

Maugham said that an appeal will be sought in the court tomorrow.