Opposing groups of campaigners gathered outside the UK Supreme Court in London on Monday as judges started hearing the government's appeal against a ruling that Parliament must hold a vote before Britain's European Union exit negotiations can begin.

Prime Minister Theresa May plans to trigger two years of divorce talks before the end of March by invoking Article 50 of the EU's key treaty, using centuries-old government powers known as royal prerogative.

Those powers - traditionally held by the monarch but now used by politicians - allow the government to join or leave international treaties without consulting lawmakers.

Financial entrepreneur Gina Miller and hairdresser Deir Dos Santos went to court to argue that leaving the EU will remove some of their rights, including free movement within the 28-nation bloc, and that shouldn't be done without Parliament's approval.

Last month, three High Court judges agreed - but the government says they have misinterpreted the law.

The case has raised a constitutional quandary and inflamed the country's heated debate about Brexit.

November's ruling infuriated pro-Brexit campaigners, who saw the lawsuit as an attempt to block or delay Britain's EU exit.

Miller says she has received abuse and death threats.

She arrived at court Monday with her lawyers, greeted by cheers from pro-EU campaigners dressed as judges atop an open-topped double-decker bus.

A banner on the side read "In democracy, Leave hypocrisy."

"Nigel, where are you?" they sang mockingly, in reference to former UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage, a prominent voice in the leave campaign.

He had promised to lead a march on the Supreme Court to demand judges respect the will of the majority.

It was cancelled last week after organisers said there was a risk it could be hijacked by far-right extremists.

Two anti-EU protesters held placards, one calling the case an "establishment stitch-up."

Many legal experts say the government will likely lose its appeal and be forced to give Parliament a vote.

London - 5 December 2016

1. Exterior of UK Supreme Court

2. Close up of European Union flag

3. Police entering Supreme Court

4. Wide of pro-Remain protesters from Britain for Europe singing as they arrive in open-topped London bus UPSOUND (English) "Nigel, where are you?"

5. Various of protesters outside court building, holding EU and UK flags

6. SOUNDBITE (English) David Gullant, Protester from Surrey branch of Britain for Europe:

"I am a British citizen, but I want to make sure that the UK due process is followed. So this is not about Brexit pros and cons, it's about making sure that if you have an Act of Parliament, only Parliament can change that Act of Parliament. It is not up to the prime minister to overturn it, it has got to go through due process."

7. Pro-Brexit protester Julia Waller

8. SOUNDBITE (English) Julia Waller, pro Brexit protester

"Well, I hope that the government, I hope Theresa May's hand, is strengthened. We've got to give her some credit - she can't expose her hand to Europe. Europe doesn't have our best interests at heart anyway, and I think we want to be free, and when people voted they didn't just vote for a soft Brexit or a grey Brexit, those words didn't exist then. We just voted for Brexit. We want to get out - end of (discussion)."

9. Pan from pro-Europe protesters to Supreme Court

FOR CLEAN VERSION SEE STORY NUMBER: 4231491, 4231476, 4231482

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson says he strongly disagrees with the Supreme Court ruling that Parliament's suspension was illegal.

He says the government will respect the decision but indicated he could try to suspend it again.

Johnson said in New York Tuesday that "I strongly disagree with this decision of the Supreme Court" and "I don't think this was the right decision."

He added: "It's perfectly usual to have a Queen's Speech, that's what we want to do."

The Queen's Speech outlines the government's plan for the coming session of Parliament.

Johnson's office meanwhile said he will not resign.

Downing St. said Johnson will fly back from a U.N. General Assembly in New York overnight, earlier than planned.

That will bring him back to London by the time Parliament resumes on Wednesday.

This comes as UK House of Commons Speaker John Bercow welcomed the Supreme Court's ruling that the suspension of Parliament was illegal and said that members are set to resume their work on Wednesday morning.

He said citizens are "entitled" to have Parliament perform its core constitutional duties.

Whitle an anti-government protester outside the court welcomed the ruling and said MP's should go back to Parliament as soon as possible.

"We are in a national crisis right now, and we leave the European Union in just over a month so we need to get back in there and start talking about it because if we don't then we're gonna have some big problems," said Jacob Archbold.

Pro-Brexit demonstrators, meanwhile, chanted slogans of support for Johnson.

But Brexit supporter Michael McFadden also said that Johnson and the Conservatives had "destroyed themselves" and accused former Prime Minister Theresa May of making Brexit backers "look a bunch of fools and we are not a bunch of fools."

The landmark decision immediately prompted calls for Johnson to quit.

ASSOCIATED PRESS

New York - 24 September 2019

1. SOUNDBITE (English) Boris Johnson, British Prime Minister:

"I strongly disagree with this decision of the Supreme Court. I have the utmost respect for our judiciary. I don't think this was the right decision. I think that the prerogative of prorogation has been used for centuries without this kind of challenge. It's perfectly usual to have a Queen's Speech, that's what we want to do. But more importantly let's be in no doubt, there are a lot of people who want to frustrate Brexit. There are a lot of people who basically want to stop this country coming out of the EU."

++SEPARATED BY WHITE FLASH++

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Boris Johnson, British Prime Minister:

"As the law stands we leave on October the 31st and I'm very hopeful that we will get a deal and I think what the people of the country want is to see our parliamentarians coming together, working on, in the national interest to get this thing done and that's what we're going to do."

++SEPARATED BY WHITE FLASH++

UK POOL

London – 24 September 2019

3. SOUNDBITE (English) John Bercow, Speaker of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom:

"In the light of that explicit judgment I have instructed the House authorities to prepare, not for the recall - the prorogation was unlawful and is void - to prepare for the resumption of the business of the House of Commons. Specifically, I've instructed the House authorities to undertake such steps as are necessary to ensure that the House of Commons sits tomorrow and that it does so at eleven thirty AM (10:30 GMT)."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

London - 24 September 2019

4. "Anti-government protester wearing a Boris Johnson puppet head, holding a placard reading (English) "Boris Johnson guilty."

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Jacob Archbold, 21-year-old anti-Brexit protester:

"They need to get back in and start debating Brexit. It's the big issue of the day, we are in a national crisis right now, and we leave the European Union in just over a month so we need to get back in there and start talking about it because if we don't then we're gonna have some big problems, so great ruling today and hopefully we're gonna be able to get back in there and get talking about Brexit."

6. Various of pro-Brexit protesters holding banner reading (English) "Brexit Now"

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Michael McFadden, Pro-Brexit protester:

"You know I'm not trying to be diplomatic, I'm just trying to be realistic, it's not winning or losing, what happens here today we are all gonna lose from it and (UK Prime Minister Boris) Johnson and the Tory party they all have destroyed themselves, there will be no Tory party after this. (Former UK Prime Minister) Theresa May just made us look a bunch of fools and we are not a bunch of fools. The fact that we don't riot around the streets, yet, doesn't mean we are afraid to."

8. Pro-Brexit protesters chanting "We love Boris"

As UK's Prime Minister Theresa May wants to start Britain's divorce from the European Union (EU), eleven judges may stand in her way.

On Monday, May's government will ask the justices of the Supreme Court to overturn a ruling that Parliament must hold a vote before Britain's exit negotiations can begin, a case that has raised a constitutional quandary and inflamed the country's heated debate about Brexit.

May plans to trigger two years of divorce talks before the end of March 2017 by invoking Article 50 of the EU's key treaty, using centuries-old government powers known as royal prerogative.

The powers - traditionally held by the monarch but now used by politicians - enable decisions about joining or leaving international treaties to be made without a vote of Parliament.

A hairdresser and a financial entrepreneur, Deir Dos Santos and Gina Miller, went to court to argue that leaving the EU will remove some of their rights, including free movement within the bloc, and that shouldn't be done without Parliament's approval.

Last month, three High Court judges agreed, but the government says they have misinterpreted the law.

Government lawyers led by Attorney General Jeremy Wright will argue this week that the British people have spoken by voting in a June 23 referendum to leave the EU.

In written arguments published before Monday's hearing, government lawyers say the use of royal prerogative to start the talks is "constitutionally appropriate and lawful."

Many legal experts say the government will likely lose its appeal and be forced to give Parliament a vote, but the government was left with little choice than to proceed with the case anyway.

"It's politically problematic, I think, to be seen to not pursue all legal avenues to obstruct this attempt to, in the eyes of some critics, derail the Brexit process," says Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London.

In a reflection of the constitutional importance of the case - which hinges on the balance of power between Parliament and the executive - all 11 Supreme Court judges will hear the appeal, the first time the full court has sat since it was founded in 2009.

The case is scheduled to last four days, with a ruling likely in January.

Complicating the picture are new participants including the Scottish government, which argues the Edinburgh-based Scottish Parliament should get a vote, too.

Britons voted by 52 to 48 percent on June 23 to leave the EU, but voters in Scotland strongly backed staying in, and the Scottish government says they should not be dragged out of the EU against their will.

London - 1 December 2016

1. Exterior of UK Supreme Court building, traffic on street

2. Close of symbol reading (English): "The Supreme Court"

3. Various exteriors of Supreme Court building

4. Various of Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London, looking at book

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London:

"Well, I think that there are two reasons probably (why the government appealed the High Court ruling that Parliament must hold a vote before negotiations of Britain's exit from the European Union can begin). The first is that it was very confident that it would win at the beginning, and I think it's reluctant to move from that position of confidence. And secondly, it's politically problematic, I think, to be seen to not pursue all legal avenues to obstruct this attempt to, in the eyes of some critics, derail the Brexit process."

6. Cutaway of King

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London:

"The reaction in some of the media (to the government's loss in the High Court), in particular in the Daily Mail and the Daily Express was, I would say, outrageous. It has been common to criticise judges in the past and I think criticism of judges is perfectly acceptable - they are public officials after all, but this type of language, 'Enemies of the people' (Daily Mail headline the day after the ruling) reminded me of the kinds of things we saw in Nazi Germany."

8. Cutaway of King

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London:

"This is quintessentially a role for judges to play. It's an unclear legal position. The devolved governments don't agree, many members of parliament don't agree. There needs to be an authoritative ruling on what the role of these statutes is in the Brexit process, and that can only be given by a court."

10. Cutaway of King

11. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London:

"I think that a government loss at the Supreme Court would not derail the Brexit process, but I also think it would be more than a mere speed bump because having to bring forward legislation to give notice would mean that there would be a participation of a much broader range of voices, both in Parliament and in the devolved legislatures and among the devolved governments. And when these voices are heard there is a political obligation of sorts to respond to these voices, to take them into account, to not proceed in a way that ignores them altogether, and I think that will make a difference to the outcome of the Brexit process, but I don't think it will stop it."

12. Cutaway of King

13. Pan of books

14. Various exteriors of Houses of Parliament

In a major blow to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Britain's highest court ruled Tuesday that his decision to suspend Parliament for five weeks in the crucial countdown to the country's Brexit deadline was illegal.

The unanimous, strongly worded Supreme Court judgment declared the order to suspend Parliament "void and of no effect."

The court found that Johnson acted to limit debate on Britain's impending departure from the European Union in violation of Parliament's constitutional role.

House of Commons Speaker John Bercow welcomed the historic verdict and said Parliament would resume its business Wednesday morning.

There will not be a Prime Minister Questions session in Parliament on Wednesday because Johnson is in New York for the U.N. General Assembly.

An anti-government protester outside the court welcomed the ruling and said MP's should go back to Parliament as soon as possible.

"We are in a national crisis right now, and we leave the European Union in just over a month so we need to get back in there and start talking about it because if we don't then we're gonna have some big problems," said Jacob Archbold.

Pro-Brexit demonstrators, meanwhile, chanted slogans of support for Johnson.

But Brexit supporter Michael McFadden also said that Johnson and the Conservatives had "destroyed themselves" and accused former Prime Minister Theresa May of making Brexit backers "look a bunch of fools and we are not a bunch of fools."

The landmark decision immediately prompted calls for Johnson to quit.

He has not yet commented on the ruling but had said earlier that he would comply with the court's decision.

London - 24 September 2019

1. Various of anti-government protester wearing a Boris Johnson puppet head, holding a placard reading (English) "Boris Johnson guilty."

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Jacob Archbold, 21-year-old anti-Brexit protester:

"Well, Parliament should come back and sit, I have seen already a few photos of MPs already sitting back in the House of Commons and, you know, they need to get back in and start debating Brexit. It's the big issue of the day, we are in a national crisis right now, and we leave the European Union in just over a month so we need to get back in there and start talking about it because if we don't then we're gonna have some big problems, so great ruling today and hopefully we're gonna be able to get back in there and get talking about Brexit."

3. Various of pro-Brexit protesters holding banner reading (English) "Brexit Now"

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Michael McFadden, Pro-Brexit protester:

"You know I'm not trying to be diplomatic, I'm just trying to be realistic, it's not winning or losing, what happens here today we are all gonna lose from it and (UK Prime Minister Boris) Johnson and the Tory party they all have destroyed themselves, there will be no Tory party after this. (Former UK Prime Minister) Theresa May just made us look a bunch of fools and we are not a bunch of fools. The fact that we don't riot around the streets, yet, doesn't mean we are afraid to."

5. Various of pro-Brexit protesters

6. Protesters chanting pro-Boris Johnson chant UPSOUND (English): "We love you Boris, we do, oh Boris we love you."

Britain's government must get parliamentary approval before starting the process of leaving the European Union, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday, potentially delaying Prime Minister Theresa May's plans to trigger exit negotiations by the end of March.

The 8-3 ruling from the judges forces the government to put a bill before Parliament, giving pro-EU politicians a chance to soften the terms of Brexit - Britain's exit from the EU.

"Leave" campaigners had objected, saying Parliament shouldn't have the power to overrule the electorate, which voted to leave the bloc in a June 23 referendum.

The Supreme Court's decision doesn't mean that Britain will remain in the EU - but it could delay the process.

Still, May's Brexit secretary, David Davis, told the House of Commons on Tuesday that the government timetable remained on track, and that officials would introduce a bill within days.

"They (parliament) need to be involved before we leave," said Charlie Mullins, founder of Pimlico Plumbers, who helped fund Article 50 legal challenge.

May had argued the referendum gave her a mandate to take Britain out of the EU and that discussing the details of her strategy with Parliament would weaken the government's negotiating position.

UKIP leader Paul Nuttall said the result was what he expected, saying "I think we've lost the battle today and I'm disappointed but not surprised, but we will win the war."

London - 24 January 2017

1. Pan down UK Supreme Court entrance

2. Police outside

3. Top shot media and entrance

4. Set up of Charlie Mullins, founder of Pimlico Plumbers

5. Close up Mullins' tie

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Charlie Mullins, founder of Pimlico Plumbers, helped fund Article 50 legal challenge:

"Well I think it was all unnecessary. If she would have got parliament involved, rather than you know, saying that she's gonna get on with it, then she was saying, 'oh, they can vote on this once she's negotiated a deal' - well that's all too late then. Once she's negotiated a deal, once we've left the EU and we're offered the deal we've got, there is no point in parliament getting involved. They need to be involved before we leave. And now I think they can put enough pressure on to her to make sure we get a soft Brexit."

7. Pan down Supreme Court

8. Various pro-EU demonstrators

9. Various exteriors of UK parliament

10. Various cutaways of Paul Nuttall, UK Independence Party leader

11. SOUNDBITE (English) Paul Nuttall, UKIP leader:

"I think it's what we expected, I think we've lost the battle today and I'm disappointed but not surprised, but we will win the war. And now these guys behind me in the House of Commons and the House of Lords have a duty to enact the will of the people and I want to make it clear what that will is. People voted on mass on June 23rd to leave the European Union. They also voted the leave the single market. The Prime Minister of the day, David Cameron, the Chancellor, the Foreign Secretary of the day, Philip Hammond, they all made it clear, leaving the EU means leaving the single market. The British people went out and did that by a score of 52 percent. So leaving must mean leaving."

12. Mid of Parliament

13. Various set ups Andrew Blick, Director History and Policy organisation and Lecturer King's College London

14. SOUNDBITE (English) Andrew Blick, Director History and Policy and Lecturer King's College London:

"The courts upholding that principal is a very important constitutional moment that no doubt will appear in all the textbooks for years to come. No question about the constitutional significance. The political significance is a bit more complicated. What political difference will it really make? It seems unlikely that the Commons, the House of Commons, the elected chamber of parliament, would want to be seen to be blocking Brexit, to be seen to be resisting the will of the people as expressed in a referendum. That seems very unlikely. There is perhaps an outside chance that the House of Lords, the unelected chamber, might offer some kind of resistance to the bill."

15. Cutaway

16. SOUNDBITE (English) Andrew Blick, Director History and Policy and Lecturer King's College London:

"I think that timetable (set out by British Prime Minister Theresa May) still looks very plausible, but the consequence of this judgment today is that the matter is slightly out of her (May) hands in that now she has to get statutory authorisation, she has to take a bill through parliament, she has to follow through those parliamentary procedures. It can be done quickly but it does require both Houses of Parliament to agree to it if she wants it happen quickly, so there is a slight variable in there, that wasn't in there before."

17. Various exteriors of Parliament

Small groups of protesters held rival demonstrations on Monday as judges inside the Supreme Court in London were hearing arguments as to whether the government had the right to leave Europe without parliamentary approval.

Britain's Supreme Court began hearing a landmark case on Monday that will decide who has the power to trigger the UK's exit from the European Union - the government or Parliament.

The legal battle has major constitutional implications for the balance of power between the legislature and the executive, and has inflamed Britain's already raw wound over how and whether to leave the EU.

Prime Minister Theresa May plans to trigger Article 50 of the EU's key treaty by the end of March, using centuries-old government powers known as royal prerogative.

The powers - traditionally held by the monarch but now used by politicians - enable decisions about joining or leaving international treaties to be made without a parliamentary vote.

London - 5 December 2016

1. Pro-Europe demonstration in front of Supreme Court

2. Tilt down of sign reading (English): "Stop Brexit fight racism and the scapegoating of immigrants. Defend freedom of movement."

3. Various of pro-Europe protesters chanting, holding banners

4. Pan from police to protesters in front of Supreme Court

5. Rival protest groups in front of Supreme Court, police officers at scene

6. Pro-Europe protesters shouting (English): "Brexit is racist, stop Brexit now!"

7. Smart phone screen showing protesters

8. Rival protesters discussing

9. Pro-Brexit protesters, woman waving Union flag

10. Man being led away by police

11. Policewoman

12. Supreme Court and protesters

A law analyst has said Britain's Supreme Court could request a Brexit extension on behalf of the government, if Prime Minister Boris Johnson doesn't abide by a law to seek a three-month delay.

Last week, members of parliament voted in favour of the government asking the European Union for the delay if no agreement is reached before October 31.

The law was rushed through Parliament before its suspension for five weeks.

The country's Supreme Court is set to decide on Tuesday whether the suspension, which was ordered by Johnson, is legal, after Scotland's highest civil court ruled the prorogation unlawful.

Steven Peers, professor of law at Essex University told the Associated Press that the Court is likely to support the government's Brexit plans "with some limits."

On Monday, Johnson will meet European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker for the first time in an attempt to renegotiate a Brexit deal.

London - 16 September 2019

1. Various exteriors of British Parliament

2. Setup of Steven Peers, professor of law at Essex University:

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Steven Peers, professor of law at Essex University:

"Well what we've seen for the last six weeks or so is that the government, so Mr (British Prime Minister, Boris) Johnson, keeps saying that he thinks he's likely to get a deal and that they're moving towards a deal. But the signs from the EU, more or less seems, most of them to say that we're not moving much towards a deal. So, unless that somehow radically changes that's what I'd expect to sort of come out from today. Although everyone sort of jumps on what other people says and will take one word or one sentence out of what Mr (European Commission President, Jean-Claude) Juncker says and maybe the next five sentences, in order to say that he thinks we're about to do a deal. But you never know it's always possible that there's been work behind the scenes that we don't all know about that is moving us towards a deal. I wouldn't absolutely rule it out."

4. Cutaway of Peers' hands

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Steven Peers, professor of law at Essex University:

"Well I think lawyers tend to be conservative and the conservative approach, with a "small c," would be to say well let's not upset the traditional rule that governments can choose to suspend Parliament when they like. But then, the counter argument is that the government's doing more than usually suspending Parliament for just a few days here or there, it's doing it at a crucial period to stop Parliament challenging it over Brexit. The reasons it's given don't really hold up to close scrutiny. According to many people who adhere to the press it might just prorogue (suspend) Parliament again if it can. So, those are the concerns that the counter arguments have and maybe the judges will take them into account."

6. Cutaway of Peers

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Steven Peers, professor of law at Essex University:

"Well no one can predict anything. I mean the Supreme Court may or may not rule against the government. Labour MPs (Members of Parliament), may or may not. The DUP (Democratic Unionist Party) may or may not switch in sufficient numbers to pass a deal, they may or may not be successful in a deal. I mean, I think the more likely scenario is the Supreme Court supports the government with some limits, on maybe what it can do in the future and the government doesn't get a deal or doesn't get it passed. So we move into a scenario, of whether it's really going to ask for an extension as the law requires it to do, to ask for an extension of EU membership. I mean, I don't think anyone should be certain about their predictions."

8. Various exteriors of Parliament

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Steven Peers, professor of law at Essex University:

"Well, there are people who've already gone to court to try and get the law enforced, which perhaps might mean the court itself delivering a notice to the EU on behalf of the government that is requesting an extension. It might mean civil servants are ordered to act on behalf of the government, in order to request an extension or you could try and enforce the law directly against Boris Johnson – if he refuses that's contempt of court, which could mean jail time. But I think that's kind of drastic, the courts are more likely to try and find a way to do it without locking anyone up."

10. Various exteriors of Parliament

11. Pan-left from London Bridge to Parliament

A law professor said an appeal of the High Court ruling stating that the British prime minister can't trigger the UK's exit from the European Union without parliamentary approval was unlikely to succeed.

Jeff King, of University College London, said Thursday's comprehensive ruling on an expansive set of grounds could cause the government's argument to fail.

But King cautioned that those hoping for a reversal of the referendum result would likely be disappointed.

London - 3 November 2016

1. Various set up shots of Professor of Law Jeff King, University College London

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London:

"It was very clear, there are many points that rather than just the courts saying that we don't need to rule on this point, the court rather said that we think that point is completely untenable, in some cases suggesting that an argument was divorced from reality. So a court that was very divided on this question might well have given a much slimmer narrower ruling based on very few grounds instead of an expansive set of grounds, dealing with only a few crucial points instead of dealing with many more subtle points, but it chose the latter route. In so it gave a comprehensive ruling on many points, many of which could cause the government's argument to fail. And that gives me confidence that an appeal would be unlikely to succeed under the circumstances."

3. Cutaway of King

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London:

"It may feel that legally there are arguments that it wishes either to make again or to bring new arguments to the attention of the Supreme Court. It may feel that the political consequences of not pursuing the appeal could be problematic, it might be accused of not having followed up every available avenue. These type of accusations are already being made about the pleadings of the government in this very case. So for those reasons, it may have good political and legal reasons to appeal. My sense is that the appeal would be unlikely to be successful. I think that Supreme Court would have even more confidence to be as unequivocal as this court has been."

5. Various of King

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff King, Professor of Law, University College London:

"If that 48 percent (those supporting remain) is hoping this legal challenge will stop Brexit, I think they will be disappointed. I think whether Brexit goes ahead will be a function of where Parliament takes this issue from here. And that's exactly what all the judges in the case were taking pains to point out.''

7. Cutaway of King

UK Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay said Thursday that his government will respect the outcome of an expected ruling by Britain's top court on whether Prime Minister Boris Johnson acted unlawfully when he suspended Parliament.

Johnson sent lawmakers home until 14 October, and his opponents claim he did it to prevent them scrutinizing his plan to take Britain out of the EU at the end of next month, with or without a divorce deal.

Speaking during a visit to Madrid, Barclay said the government would "abide" by the Supreme Court's ruling.

The court was hearing final arguments Thursday. Judges were set to hear from a lawyer for the former prime minister, John Major, who is among those challenging the decision by Johnson, one of his successors as Conservative leader.

Opponents have also accused the prime minister of misleading Queen Elizabeth II, whose formal approval was needed to suspend the legislature.

The government says the suspension is routine and not motivated by Brexit, and argues that judges should not interfere in politics.

Madrid - 19 September 2019

1. UK Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay entering breakfast meeting with Spanish business leaders

2. Conference sign

3. Wide of Barclay

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Stephen Barclay, UK Brexit Secretary:

"And it is absolutely the correct process that on these matters, then the Supreme Court will form a view and I await that judgement and we of course as a government will abide by it."

5. Camera

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Stephen Barclay, UK Brexit Secretary:

"This was a clear democratic decision of the British people (EU referendum), it is damaging, I think, for democracy if people start to say they will pick and choose which democratic votes they adhere to, I don't think that's what politicians should do so it is important that we deliver on the result. There is time from the (European) Council to the 31st of October. And parliament, there is one thing as the minister for Brexit I can assure you of is parliament has not had a shortage of time to discuss the issue of Brexit."

7. Attendees

8. SOUNDBITE (English) Stephen Barclay, UK Brexit Secretary:

"The UK government abides by the law, the ministerial code requires ministers, including myself to abide by the law, and of course we will abide by the law. Now that it is not to say that we won't look at it closely and test exactly where we are."

9. Wide of Barclay

Britain's government must get parliamentary approval before starting the process of leaving the European Union, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday.

The decision potentially delays Prime Minister Theresa May's plans to trigger exit negotiations by the end of March.

London - 24 January 2017

1. Various of Parliament

2. Evening Standard newspaper vendor talking to security officer

3. Close of Evening Standard newspaper, reading (English) "Judges' blow to May over Brexit."

4. Vendor and security officer talking

5. Close of newspaper lead, reading (English) "PM can't trigger Article 50 without Parliament backing, says supreme court in historic ruling."

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson faces a wait for a ruling from the UK's highest court over his advice to the Queen to suspend Parliament for five weeks.

The Supreme Court in London has been asked to determine whether the prorogation move - which has closed down Parliament until October 14 - was unlawful.

A panel of 11 justices heard appeals over three days arising out of separate legal challenges in England and Scotland, in which leading judges reached different conclusions.

At the close of the unprecedented hearing on Thursday, the court's president, Brenda Hale, said the 11 judges would give their ruling early next week.

Lawyer for Scottish National Party MP, Joanna Cherry, one of a group of Scottish MPs who took legal action against the government, said outside court that both sides of the Brexit divide should be worried about the prime minister suspending parliament "as an inconvenience."

"This is not an issue about Brexit. This is an issue about who holds power in this country," Jolyon Maugham said.

London - 19 September 2019

1. Exteriors of UK Supreme Court with media gathered outside

2. Close of court building

3. Various of media outside Supreme Court

4. Brexit supporter holding a 'We Voted Leave' placard

5. Protesters against suspension of parliament gathered outside Supreme Court

6. Brexit supporters holding placards and union jack umbrella

7. Protestors holding a banner reading (English) "Have a nice long holiday folks. Don't come back until Nov 1st Thank you xxx 17.4 million people"

8. Media gathered outside the Supreme Court

9. Transparency activist who filed a case against the suspension of parliament, Gina Miller, leaving court with others

10. Scottish National Party MP, Joanna Cherry, one of a group of Scottish MPs who took legal action against the government, and her lawyer Jolyon Maugham walking out of court

11. The Supreme Court sign

12. SOUNDBITE (English) Joanna Cherry, Scottish National Party MP:

"I would like the court to make as clear a statement as possible as to what should follow. In a normal functioning democracy one would expect the prime minister to obey what the Supreme Court says. But we are not currently in a normal functioning democracy. We're in a democracy, in adverted commas, where a prime minister with no majority has suspended parliament because it was getting in his way. So I would hope that the UK Supreme Court will be as clear as they possibly can be about the consequences of their decision, should they find in our favour."

13. Police gathered outside court

14. SOUNDBITE (English) Jolyon Maugham, Joanna Cherry's lawyer:

"All of us, whatever side of the Brexit divide we are on, should be worried about a world in which a prime minister can suspend parliament as an inconvenience. Those who support Boris Johnson's actions at the moment should be asking themselves the question, how they would feel about a future Labour prime minister, perhaps Jeremy Corbyn, who did not any longer want to be subjected to the constraints that parliament might face upon his actions. How would they feel about this? This is not an issue about Brexit. This is an issue about who holds power in this country. Is it Parliament elected by the people or is it a leader elected by a tiny number of members - self-selecting members - of a particular political party?"

15. Public lawyer from Oxford University, Stefan Theil, using his mobile phone

16. SOUNDBITE (English) Stefan Theil, Public lawyer from Oxford University:

"Because it is the case that Parliament is now prorogued there are certain things that it cannot do anymore. The most important thing is to hold the government to account and it's suggested that there would be a possibility for a - hypothetically speaking - for a prime minister to prorogue Parliament in order to get rid of the army or to prorogue Parliament when it becomes apparent that he or she is going to lose a motion of no confidence and suggested that these examples demonstrate that the principle really has to be that prorogation has to be strictly controlled by the courts. There needs to be anxious interrogation of the reasons for prorogation when it touches on these fundamental constitutional principles."

17. Cutaway of Theil's hands

18. SOUNDBITE (English) Stefan Theil, Public lawyer from Oxford University:

"So potentially very far reaching. So depending on what the courts end up deciding it could mean that the Prime Minister unlawfully prorogued Parliament and that Parliament could sit again. It could also mean that they leave it at a declaration of unlawfulness and don't take any further action, which would then have political repercussion. It's very hard to say at this stage."

19. Exterior of Supreme Court

20. SOUNDBITE (English) Stefan Theil, Public lawyer from Oxford University:

"It looks really bad for Boris Johnson I think if it's found to be unlawful. This is really an unprecedented case. It really hasn't happened before that prorogation has been before the courts like this and it would be bad for any prime minister I should think."

21. Security guard outside court

22. Exteriors of Supreme Court

Austrian Presidential candidate Norbert Hofer said that if the European Union is not reformed to become less centralised, it would be right to ask Austrians if they want to remain part of the bloc.

The right-wing candidate said Austria joined the EU "under different circumstances" and if the bloc moves towards further integration "then you would have to ask again: do you want to be a member in a centralist Europe? The result could absolutely be 'yes'. But you have to ask the question."

Hofer said he hopes that the current EU crisis after the Brexit vote could have a "healing effect" which could even invigorate the Union.

Hofer added that he was against Turkey joining the EU but in favour of tight economic and friendly relations with the country saying, "for me Turkey is not a European country with the exception of a few square kilometres."

He also criticised EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, saying he didn't represent "the picture of the European Union we wish".

Hofer will head his right-wing Freedom Party in a rerun of the presidential election ordered by the country's highest court on grounds of wide-spread voting irregularities in the first ballot.

Austria's chancellor on Tuesday said the government has set October 2 as the date for the rerun of the presidential election

The date, announced Tuesday by Chancellor Christian Kern, still has to be approved by parliament, but that is only a formality.

The Constitutional Court on Thursday had announced that the May runoff between Hofer and left-leaning independent Alexander Van Der Bellen must be repeated.

Van der Bellen had won by less than 30,000 votes.

The ruling essentially matched a challenge by Hofer's party, which asserted the election's results were distorted by mistakes and sloppiness in counting absentee ballots and by other ballot violations.

Austrian Presidential candidate Norbert Hofer said that if the European Union is not reformed to become less centralised, it would be right to ask Austrians if they want to remain part of the bloc.

The right-wing candidate said Austria joined the EU "under different circumstances" and if the bloc moves towards further integration "then you would have to ask again: do you want to be a member in a centralist Europe? The result could absolutely be 'yes'. But you have to ask the question."

Hofer said he hopes that the current EU crisis after the Brexit vote could have a "healing effect" which could even invigorate the Union.

Hofer added that he was against Turkey joining the EU but in favour of tight economic and friendly relations with the country saying, "for me Turkey is not a European country with the exception of a few square kilometres."

He also criticised EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, saying he didn't represent "the picture of the European Union we wish".

Hofer will head his right-wing Freedom Party in a rerun of the presidential election ordered by the country's highest court on grounds of wide-spread voting irregularities in the first ballot.

Austria's chancellor on Tuesday said the government has set October 2 as the date for the rerun of the presidential election

The date, announced Tuesday by Chancellor Christian Kern, still has to be approved by parliament, but that is only a formality.

The Constitutional Court on Thursday had announced that the May runoff between Hofer and left-leaning independent Alexander Van Der Bellen must be repeated.

Van der Bellen had won by less than 30,000 votes.

The ruling essentially matched a challenge by Hofer's party, which asserted the election's results were distorted by mistakes and sloppiness in counting absentee ballots and by other ballot violations.

Vienna - 5 July 2016

1. Austrian presidential candidate Norbert Hofer at desk

2. Hofer at desk

3. Hands shuffling through documents

4. SOUNDBITE (German) Norbert Hofer, Austrian presidential candidate:

"My opinion is that should treaties be developed that say 'we disempower the member states, we build a centralist Europe under complete elimination of the unanimity principle' then you would have to ask the Austrians if they wanted to be a member in such a Europe. Because the joining of the European Union happened under different conditions. That was a very important promise that we as a small country, also because of the unanimity principle, can have a say in important questions. Then this would be a different Europe. Then you would have to ask again: do you want to be a member in a centralist Europe? The result could absolutely be 'yes'. But you have to ask the question."

5. Hofer during interview

6. Various of portrait of Tyrolean leader Andreas Hofer on wall

7. SOUNDBITE (German) Norbert Hofer, Austrian presidential candidate:

"What happens if Turkey becomes a member of the European Union? That would also be a completely different Europe. And I think the European Union could hardly cope with this. I'm in favour of a privileged partnership with Turkey, with tight economic relations, friendly relations. But for me Turkey is not a European country with the exception of a few square kilometres."

8. Hofer during interview

9. Hofer's hands

10. SOUNDBITE (German) Norbert Hofer, Austrian presidential candidate:

"I strongly believe that the people in responsible positions in the European Union and and the member states have learned from this and also realise how critical such a decision can be. I believe in a healing effect. And maybe the European Union can even come out invigorated out of this crisis - if you make the right decisions and if the right personalities are in power."

11. Hofer during interview

12. SOUNDBITE (German) Norbert Hofer, Austrian presidential candidate:

"For me Juncker is not someone who should have this position now in such a critical situation. My view is similar to, I think Merkel, who seems to have already made some remarks. For many citizens Juncker doesn't represent the picture of the European Union we wish. This non-serious appearance, slapping heads of states and governments when they arrive. He must be aware of the big responsibility he is bearing in this position. You can't play the comic relief, that's just not possible."

13. Various of Hofer at his desk

Resident in Southend have mixed views to the landmark British Supreme Court ruling that Prime Minister Boris Johnson's suspension of Parliament was illegal.

Many in the English seaside town, which voted in the 2016 referendum to leave the EU, want the government to go ahead with Brexit, even if it means the UK leaves without a deal.

Others, however, expressed dismay at Johnson's actions regarding the prorogation of Britain's Parliament.

Resident Nicholas Williams said he supports the UK prime minister, adding that lawmakers aiming to block Brexit were "disrespecting our wishes."

Meanwhile resident Dermott Stanley regarded Johnson as a "crook" saying the leader had lied to the country.

"He's not in it for the common people, ordinary people like you and I, the nurses, the police, the emergency services, we don't have millions of pounds to ride the storm that's going to hit us when Brexit falls," he said.

Johnson remains on a collision course with Parliament over his determination to pull Britain out of the European Union on October 31 even if no divorce deal is reached.

Johnson will address Parliament later Wednesday but, looking ahead to a possible early general election, has begun to position himself as the champion of the people facing a recalcitrant establishment bent on frustrating the 2016 Brexit vote.

Southend - 25 September 2019

1. Various of beach area and the arcade

2. Set up shot of Southend resident Nicholas Williams

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Nicholas Williams, Southend resident:

"I think he (Boris Johnson) makes a good prime minister. He seems to have the bottle to do the job. But of course there's lots of MPs who don't want to leave the EU. And as I said, that's disrespecting our wishes. They keep talking about democracy but the democratic vote was to leave the EU. I think they are just making excuses."

4. Set up shot of retiree Jean Larman (in navy coat)

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Jean Larman, retiree:

"Although you've got to trust their (Supreme Court) judgement of course. But I can't believe the Queen (Elizabeth II) would put her name to anything without checking it first. That's the first thing, checking it out, you know. The second thing is what will happen from now on if someone doesn't like a government or something that they think isn't right, they're going to take it to the High Courts again? I don't understand it. People voted out and I know it's complicated. Why aren't we leaving? and why do they keep putting obstacles in the way to leave?"

6. Set up shots of retiree Stephen Bradford

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Stephen Bradford, retiree:

"Well, I think it's disgusting. Simple fact is now the courts are now running this country. That's it."

8. Set up shots of retiree Peter Hale

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Peter Hale, retiree:

"No, I'm not a supporter of Boris (Johnson). I think he's been very, very silly, the way he did it I said, it's illegal you can't shut Parliament down, can you? So that's what I think. Is he fit to be prime minister? I don't really think so. I think the man is a bit silly."

10. SOUNDBITE (English) Natalie Kendrick, Southend resident:

"At the end of the day, I done to leave. So if there's a deal that they can all come to or a no-deal then it's better going without a no-deal isn't it? Then doing something that's going to undermine us and lower us all the way down. We are better off getting the best rate we can and if it's a no-deal then fine fair enough, a no-deal."

11. Wide of shop exteriors at the beach

11. Set up of nurse Dermott Stanley

12. SOUNDBITE (English) Dermott Stanley, nurse:

"To be perfectly honest, I believe the man is a crook. He's lied to the country. He's a multi-millionaire. He's in it for himself. He's in it for power. He's grabbing power. Eric Blair or George Orwell, as we all know him, said power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely and I'm afraid that's my opinion of the man. He's not in it for the common people, ordinary people like you and I, the nurses, the police, the emergency services, we don't have millions of pounds to ride the storm that's going to hit us when Brexit falls."

13. Various of shops on the beach front

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson did not advise the Queen to suspend Parliament for five weeks for any "improper purpose", Supreme Court justices have heard.

Barrister James Eadie, representing the Prime Minister, told the 11-strong panel that the suggestion the prorogation was intended to "stymie" Parliament ahead of Brexit was "untenable".

At the end of the second day of the hearing, there were jeers from pro-Brexit campaigners as transparency activist Gina Miller, who helped to bring the action, left the court building.

Legal expert Stefan Theil said it had been a good day for the government in court, but it was unclear which way the judges would lean when they make their ruling.

The court is hearing appeals on two separate challenges in the English and Scottish courts over the prorogation of Parliament.

The justices will continue to hear submissions on Thursday, the third and final day of the hearing, but it is not yet known when they will give a decision.

London - 18 September 2019

1. Gina Miller, transparency activist who is appealing against the High Court's decision that suspending parliament was not illegal, leaving court

2. Exterior of Supreme Court

3. Pro-Brexiteers shouting at Miller outside court

4. Various of pro-Brexiteers and supporters of Boris Johnson, UK Prime Minister, holding banners, British flags

5. Various of anti-Brexit protestors who are against the suspension of parliament, holding placards, banners

6. Zoom in of Joanna Cherry, Scottish National Party lawmaker

7. Police standing outside the Supreme Court

8. SOUNDBITE (English) Joanna Cherry, Scottish National Party lawmaker:

"And what's clearly coming to light, what's really clearly been emphasised today is the lack of candour on the part of the British Government about the reasons for the prorogation. Earlier today QC James Eadie, their lawyer, was asked if he could clarify what the reasons for the prorogation were and he wasn't prepared to do that other than by referring to the documents that have been lodged in court. But, it's been repeatedly emphasised today that there's no witness statements from the government accompanying those documents."

9. Stefan Theil, legal expert at Oxford University, talking outside the Supreme Court

10. SOUNDBITE (English) Stefan Theil, Oxford University:

"So the main points for the government were obviously that this is not judiciable, that was the one that was really quite leant on heavily. Justiciability means 'is this a thing that a court should look in to?', in other words can and should the court deal with this case and look in to the lawfulness of the prorogation? For the applicants respectively, the main issue was well, this was unlawful, the Prime Minister misled the Queen when advising her to prorogue Parliament and is doing it for an improper purpose."

11. Exterior of Supreme Court

12. Stefan Theil, Oxford University:

"It is really hard to say. Whenever you feel like you get a sense of what the judges are thinking, they immediately ask a question that sort of turns that on its head. So it's really hard to say. They're keeping their cards really closely to their chest. It's difficult to say. I think the government had a pretty good day today, I would say that. But again, it's about the law, it's less about the symbolism and the theatrics, so we'll have to wait and see."

13. Lawyers coming out of court

14. People waving Union Jack flags, cameras set up outside the Supreme Court

The British Parliament opens for its new legislative session on Monday, with Queen Elizabeth II set to present the government's agenda.

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson is expected to focus on spending pledges for the police, health and public services.

Matt Bevington, a researcher from the think tank UK in a Changing Europe said that the implementation of the govenermnets domestic agenda may well be disrupted by Brexit and uncertainties associated with it.

Bevington also pointed out that the day's events had a "degree of electioneering" about it, as the governing party positions itself for potential upcoming elections.

He also said that given events around Johnson's attempts to prorogue parliament have brought the Queen "into the political process more than usual", he expects govenment want the speech "to remain as neutral as possible".

An earlier attempt by the government to shut down Parliament for five weeks was ruled illegal by the U.K. Supreme Court, because it had the effect of preventing Parliament from scrutinizing the government's Brexit plans.

London -14 October 2019

++DAWN SHOTS++

1. Exterior of UK parliament

2. Commuters walking on bridge

3. Mid of two policemen

++DAY SHOTS++

4. Row of British flags

5. Wide of security around parliament

6. Various of Matthew Bevington, researcher at the think tank UK in a Changing Europe, holding umbrella

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Matthew Bevington, researcher at UK in a Changing Europe:

"So we're going to see the state opening of parliament which is basically where the Queen arrives, she announces the government's programme for the next parliamentary term, which will include all the major legislative plans, spending plans and everything he (Prime Minister Boris Johnson) plans to do over the next year. The elephant in the room of course is our EU policy and whether we have actually left or not. That will obviously have a big bearing, but this will basically be the government's domestic agenda and setting out what it wants to do, in theory, if it can do. But of course it doesn't have a majority in parliament so whether it can actually implement any of these plans is highly doubtful."

8. Various of security around parliament

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Matthew Bevington, researcher at UK in a Changing Europe:

"There's a degree of electioneering about all of this actually. It's about saying that the government actually wants to reinvest in a lot of the public services that over the past few years have been under funded. The conservatives seem to be orientating themselves away from their approach over the last sort of five to seven years and are saying we are no longer the austerity party, we realise that we need more police, more spending in education, and kind of going back to the fundamentals of what the one-nation Tory (Conservative Party) government might do, which means basically good on security, good on public services, moderate in all senses of the word - but of course Brexit may disrupt all of these plans before they even get started."

10. Commuters walking near parliament

11. SOUNDBITE (English) Matthew Bevington, researcher at UK in a Changing Europe:

"I'm sure actually given that she (Queen Elizabeth II) has been brought into the political process more than usual over the last few weeks with the Supreme Court process there will be nothing, I think, that will even hint at a political agenda on behalf of the Queen. So, I mean, they'll want to remain as neutral as possible, and actually, the last time she gave a queen's speech she actually seemed quite downbeat about the whole thing. So you know, she'll try and remain as neutral as possible, there's no doubt about that. The palace I think were very upset that she had been brought into the process during the Supreme Court hearings so yes I think she will try and remain as neutral as possible and not even give a hint of what her political views might be."

12. Various of commuters

13. Close of lion statue on bridge

14. Exterior of parliament and security

15. British flag flying at parliament

A British constitutional analyst said Tuesday's Supreme Court ruling that UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson illegally suspended parliament was a "serious defeat" for the government and that the decison upheld the "fundamentals" of the constitution.

Professor Robert Hazell of University College of London told said that the unanimous ruling was based on two principles, parliamentary sovereignty and parliamentary accountability.

Members of Parliament will resume proceedings on Wednesday instead of on October 14 - the original prorogation date which was set less than three weeks before Britain's scheduled departure from the European Union.

Hazell said the extra time for debate in the lead-up to Brexit would be "important" so "parliament can scrutinise and hold the government to account".

Johnson's Conservative Party colleague, Sir Alan Duncan, sided with the ruling and said that it was important "to defend the integrity of our courts process and our judicial process".

On the streets of Belfast in Northern Ireland, an area which could be affected by the so-called Irish "backstop" agreement, reaction to the ruling was mixed.

Resident Brian Strong said the decision would hopefully mean parliament would have more time to review the controversial backstop, which acts as an insurance policy for an open Irish border.

London - 24 September 2019

1. Close-up of a yellow sticker on a post outside Britain's Supreme Court reading (English) "Brexit is a crime scene"

2. Close-up of court crest of arms

3. Various of man flying a balloon depicting UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on a pole, with an "Unelected advisor" badge of political strategist Dominic Cummings around his head

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Sir Alan Duncan, Conservative Party member of parliament:

"Judges are always right so some people can disagree with the judgement if they want but I think everyone has to defend the integrity of our courts process and our judicial process, and I fully defend the integrity of the judges and the way they have behaved."

5. Various of protesters with placards outside parliament

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Jay Sills, American tourist:

"We're happy that the Supreme Court ruled that what Boris Johnson did was unlawful and I think that tomorrow is going to be very exciting here. We hope to watch as the House of Commons meets, so it's very exciting today. We're happy for the Brits that they have the rule of law here, something that we're going to have to rely on in the United States with our unlawful president."

7. Various exteriors Supreme Court, media

Belfast - 24 September 2019

8. Wide of Belfast town hall

9. People waking

10. SOUNDBITE (English) Brian Strong, Belfast resident:

"For Brexit, it'll mean parliament will be able to review what Boris' team has been discussing with the EU. For Northern Ireland specifically, it will allow the parliament to review the backstop options that are being put forward because we don't know what they are and we don't know if it's acceptable. This way, at least it becomes public because parliament can oversee the government's organisation."

12. Various of people walking

13. SOUNDBITE (English) Mairead Fox, Belfast resident:

"I'm sorry it didn't work for him (Boris Johnson) because I think he's a fair man and I think he will try and get the best Brexit for us all. So if he thought that by dissolving parliament that he was going to get it pushed through then fair enough."

14. Various street views

London - 24 September 2019

15. Various set ups of Professor Robert Hazell, University College of London

16. SOUNDBITE (English) Professor Robert Hazell, Constitution Unit, University College of London:

"What the court has reminded us is about the fundamentals of the British constitution which rests on two principles: the first is parliamentary sovereignty, but the second is parliamentary accountability and it's really important to our political system and to our democracy that parliament is in session and parliament can scrutinise and hold the government to account, particularly at such a crucial turning point as this, when we're coming towards the last 40 days before Brexit at the end of October."

17. Various of books on shelf

18. SOUNDBITE (English) Professor Robert Hazell, Constitution Unit, University College of London:

"It was a very serious defeat for the Prime Minister who is currently in New York. I would expect him to return early to the UK because parliament is going to start sitting from tomorrow morning and I expect him at the earliest opportunity to appear before parliament to explain the reasons why he asked the Queen to suspend parliament for as long as five weeks. And I hope and expect that he can also apologise for the very serious mistake that he's made. It was a serious, legal mistake. It's been ruled unlawful and it was also, clearly, a very serious political misjudgment."

19. Cutway of books

20. SOUNDBITE (English) Professor Robert Hazell, Constitution Unit, University College of London:

"I was dismayed at the Prime Minister's statement in response to the court decision. He said that he would respect the decision of the court but then in the next breath he said he disagreed with the court's ruling and its reasons. Well, in a country which observes the rule of law, respect for the court means understanding their rulings and to say that you will fully comply with them and that you will do so willingly and not reluctantly."

21. Cutaway of books

22. SOUNDBITE (English) Professor Robert Hazell, Constitution Unit, University College of London:

"So the Prime Minister will be called to give an account to parliament and he will be held to account by parliament and the only sanctions against the Prime Minister might be those from parliament. So it's possible that if the Prime Minister continues, in effect, to be defiant, and to say that he doesn't intend to follow the court's judgement, then I would expect there to be a formal no-confidence motion moved in the parliament and then the parliament might then remove him as Prime Minister."

23. Pan left from window to Hazell

24. Close-up of UCL logo on telephone

Parliamentarians resoundingly welcomed a ruling of the UK's Supreme Court in London on Tuesday that pronounced Prime Minister Boris Johnson's suspension of Parliament to be illegal.

"This is a triumph of parliamentary sovereignty," said Caroline Lucas, Member of Britain's Parliament.

Ian Blackford, Scottish National Party leader in Westminster said the ruling was "a very clear indication to Boris Johnson and to the government that you cannot shut down parliament with impunity."

Anna Soubry, the leader of the Independent Group for Change said the decision by the Supreme Court "has huge constitutional consequences."

"It's a fantastic day for democracy," Soubry said.

The ruling by Britain's highest court that Johnson's decision during the crucial countdown to the country's Brexit deadline was illegal, is a major blow to Prime Minister.

The unanimous, strongly worded Supreme Court judgment declared the order to suspend Parliament "void and of no effect."

The court found Johnson acted to limit debate on Brexit in violation of Parliament's constitutional role.

The landmark decision immediately prompted calls for Johnson to quit.

London - 24 September 2019

1. Lawmakers coming out of the Supreme Court, cheering

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Ian Blackford, Scottish National Party leader in Westminster: ++SOUNDBITE CONTINUES FROM PREVIOUS SHOT++

"This is a marvellous day for democracy. This is a very clear indication to (British Prime Minister) Boris Johnson and to the government that you cannot shut down parliament with impunity."

++BLACK FRAMES++

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Caroline Lucas, Member of Parliament, Green Party:

"Thankfully the Supreme Court has ruled unanimously in our favour, but it should never have come to this. It shouldn't require the courts to have to uphold parliamentary sovereignty. That is why as well as celebrating this victory today we must set about putting in place a written democracy. We need a written constitution, a citizens assembly to set out that written constitution, so that we are not at the whim anymore of gentlemen's agreements that no longer work. This is a triumph of parliamentary sovereignty. This is a triumph for all of us. And I pay tribute to all of the amazing people inside the court and outside the court that have delivered this result. (Boris) Johnson must go and we must get back to work."

++BLACK FRAMES++

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Anna Soubry, Independent Group for Change leader:

"It was unanimous, and I don't think any of us in chief ever thought that they would quash the prorogation. This is a very serious matter. It has huge constitutional consequences. It's a fantastic day for democracy. And at last the people of this country are taking back control. We're all fed up with Brexit. We want it to come to an end and the only way now to resolve it is to have that people's vote and get it back to the British people."

++ENDS ON SOUNDBITE++

The deputy leader of the Irish Republican party, Sinn Fein, has called on British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to resign following a court ruling by the Supreme Court on Tuesday that his decision to suspend Parliament for five weeks in the crucial countdown to the country's Brexit deadline was illegal.

"I believe on the back of this ruling today and all of that mess that dominates the British political landscape for the last two and a half years, Boris Johnson should go. Boris Johnson should resign. Boris Johnson is not in command of his own agenda,"  Michelle O'Neill said.

The unanimous, strongly worded Supreme Court judgment declared the order to suspend Parliament "void and of no effect."

The court found that Johnson acted to limit debate on Britain's impending departure from the European Union in violation of Parliament's constitutional role.

Downing Street said on Tuesday that Johnson, who is in New York to attend a UN summit, will not resign as prime minister in the wake of the ruling.

Belfast - 24 September 2019

1. Wide of Sinn Fein headquarters

2. Mural on building

3. Letters reading Sinn Fein on exterior of building

4. Banner on wall calling for Irish unification

5. Sinn Fein deputy leader Michelle O'Neill approaching microphones

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Michelle O'Neill, Sinn Fein Deputy Leader:

"It clearly again demonstrates that this British government has lost control of its own agenda. It is a constitutional crisis - we've been saying that for some time - and I believe this is another one of those meltdown moments for this British government. All the while while that mess continues, while that chaos continues, while the Tory party fight internally, what we have here is a situation where the people did not vote for Brexit. There is not one good, positive thing to point to in terms of this Brexit agenda. It's reckless, it's catastrophic for our people and our industries."

7. Cutaway of cameraman

8. SOUNDBITE (English) Michelle O'Neill, Sinn Fein Deputy Leader:

"So we are 37 days out from the Brexit deadline, the 'do-or-die' agenda of Boris Johnson. But at the end of the day, the people here need a deal, the agri-food industry needs a deal, the services sector needs a deal, manufacturing needs a deal. So I believe on the back of this ruling today and all of that mess that dominates the British political landscape for the last two and a half years, Boris Johnson should go. Boris Johnson should resign. Boris Johnson is not in command of his own agenda. What I'm interested in is standing up for the interests of people who live here in this island, and what I'm interested in is standing very firm against the reckless Tory-DUP Brexit agenda."

9. Pan of Sinn Fein sign

The leader of Catalonia's failed secession bid in 2017 says that Spain will seek "vengeance" rather than justice when 12 of his separatist allies stand trial next week accused of rebellion and other charges.

Carles Puigdemont, who will follow the trial from self-imposed exile in Belgium, accused EU countries of double standards for recognizing Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido as that country's interim president, while ignoring his attempt to declare independence for Catalonia.

The former Catalan regional president slipped out of Spain after the government removed him from office following the regional parliament's declaration of independence on Oct. 27, 2017.

Twelve other separatists will go on trial in Spain's Supreme Court on Feb. 12 on charges including rebellion and sedition.

"We are all supporting them, helping them because they are suffering a terribly unjust and humiliating situation and being used to set an example," Puigdemont said in the interview in the Belgian town of Waterloo, south of Brussels.

The trial, he said, "will not be an act of justice but rather one of vengeance."

Spanish Supreme Court President Carlos Lesmes has dismissed such claims, insisting the trial will follow the "highest standards set by the European Union."

The trial will be broadcast on TV from Madrid. A request by defense lawyers to have Puigdemont testify via video conference was refused.

Instead, he will watch the proceedings from his home in Waterloo, a two-story brick house bordered by trimmed hedges.

Puigdemont said that what he expects will be a guilty verdict for his fellow separatists, including members of his defunct Cabinet, would only provide momentum to the separatist movement, which he predicted would gain the support of a clear majority of Catalans.

"That moment will arrive and when it does we will have all the legitimacy to take the decisions that we have already decided in parliament and have ratified in a plebiscite," he said, adding that the declaration of independence was still valid.

The "yes" vote won in a landslide in the October 2017 referendum, during which hundreds of people were injured in a police crackdown.

But those in favor of remaining with Spain largely stayed home, and Spain's central government declared the vote illegal and unconstitutional.

Subsequent regional elections indicated that Catalonia is evenly split between those in favor and those against independence.

Waterloo – 3 February 2019

1. Former Catalan president, Carles Puigdemont, entering room

2. Puigdemont talking to journalist during interview

3. SOUNDBITE (Spanish) Carles Puigdemont, former president of the regional government of Catalonia:

(Speaking about the 12 Catalan separatists who will stand trial in Spain next week):

"We are all supporting them, helping them because they are suffering a terribly unjust and humiliating situation, and are being used to set an example. The trial is not an act of justice. It will not be an act of justice but rather one of vengeance, and a punishment for future generations."

4. Cutaway Puigdemont

5. SOUNDBITE (Spanish) Carles Puigdemont, former president of the regional government of Catalonia

"What will happen when they are not just three or four points of difference in favour of independence and we clearly are more than 55 percent? Are they going to carry on in the same way? These questions need to be thought through, because that moment will arrive and when it does we will have all the legitimacy to take the decisions that we have already decided in parliament and have ratified in a plebiscite. And before this I think European democracy will have to answer once and for all, because this is a European problem and a democratic problem. Finally if European democracy is so strong as to recognise a self-proclaimed president in Venezuela without passing through an election, one must similarly answer questions about domestic matters. What happens when a democratically elected parliament is dissolved, when a democratically elected president is deposed via a coup, Article 155 (constitutional article allowing the Spanish government to suspend any region's self-government should it disobey the law or attack Spain's general interests)? The European Union needs to answer to this. This is going to happen, this is going to come; and whether they will condemn, absolve or persecute us, the over two million of Catalans who have mentally detached themselves from Spain will continue to do so, and we will need a political solution to this."

6. Cutaway Puigdemont

7. SOUNDBITE (Spanish) Carles Puigdemont, former president of the regional government of Catalonia

"As for Brexit, despite the fact it was a result that I did not like, despite the fact that it's a loss for Europe to see British democracy leave, there is the legitimacy of a referendum and a decision that was taken legitimately on this matter. And regarding this decision there needs to be a complex political reaction, not an easy and childish one. It's the same for the Catalonia case or for the negotiations about the accession of a country into the European Union. How many years have there been negotiations or conversations with Turkey, or with those in the list of nations that the European Union would like to incorporate, Kosovo or Macedonia? It will take years. Of course citizens may suffer the consequences in the process, there are transition costs that come with independence, of course there are costs, like Brexit, this is undeniable. There are also costs to dependence that one must put on the table."

8. Cutaway Puigdemont

9. SOUNDBITE (Spanish) Carles Puigdemont, former president of the regional government of Catalonia

"Catalonia declared its independence. Catalonia is not recognised by any country, Catalonia today is a de facto political subject, much more than it was a year and a half or two years ago. The persistence and will of the people to be independent remains, it's an evolution and one cannot stop the natural evolution of things."

10. Cutaway Puigdemont

11. Exterior of Puigdemont's Belgian residence

12. Pan left road leading to Puigdemont Belgian residence

13. Supporter holding Catalonia flag and talking to another girl in front of Puigdemont Belgian residence

The Supreme Court in London on Wednesday began hearing its second day of legal debate over whether prime minister Boris Johnson acted lawfully by suspending - or proroguing - parliament.

Judges must determine if Johnson overstepped his authority by suspending Parliament for a five-week period during the run-up to the 31 October deadline for Britain to leave the European Union.

The government's opponents argued that Johnson illegally shut down Parliament just weeks before the country was due to leave the 28-nation bloc for the "improper purpose" of dodging lawmakers' legitimate scrutiny of his Brexit plans.

They also accused Johnson of misleading Queen Elizabeth II, whose formal approval was needed to suspend the legislature.

The government claims the suspension was routine, not related to Brexit, and was a matter for politicians rather than the court.

The judges will rule on two appeals - one by transparency campaigner Gina Miller' and one by the government challenging a Scottish court ruling against prorogation, or suspension.

The case is expected to conclude Thursday.

London - 18 September 2019

1. Various of exteriors of the Supreme Court

2. Police standing outside the Supreme Court

3. Transparency activist Gina Miller

4. Exteriors of the Supreme Court

5. Barrister and legal commentator, Jeremy Brier, using his mobile phone

6. The Supreme Court sign

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeremy Brier, barrister and legal commentator:

"So today the Supreme Court is hearing two appeals. It's hearing an appeal from the English High Court where they said prorogation and the question of suspension of parliament is not a justiciable matter, it's not for us, they're hearing an appeal from that. They're also hearing an appeal from the Scottish inner house which actually said the opposite - it said it is a matter for us and it was unlawful. So two different results that the Supreme Court has to consider on appeal and try and bring those cases together in one unified verdict."

8. Close of Jeremy Brier's hands

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeremy Brier, barrister and legal commentator:

"Today's a hugely significant day in this day two of the Supreme Court hearing.  We heard yesterday from Gina Miller's barrister Lord Pannick saying why prorogation, the suspension of parliament, was unlawful, that it thwarted parliamentary sovereignty. Today we hear from the government's QC Sir James Eadie. He's going to really be saying, this is not a question that the courts should be involved in, it's a non-justiciable matter. It's a matter of politics and there isn't a threshold, a measuring stick by which a court can sensibly get involved and work out what's legal and what's lawful."

10. Exteriors of the Supreme Court

11. Media standing outside the Supreme Court