Britain to appeal after High Court deals Brexit blow

The British government will appeal to the country’s highest court after suffering a major setback Thursday in its attempts to take the country out of the European Union. Prime Minister Theresa May’s government said it would challenge Thursday’s High Court ruling that parliamentary approval is needed before she begins negotiations with the EU on Brexit. […]

The British government will appeal to the country’s highest court after suffering a major setback Thursday in its attempts to take the country out of the European Union.

Prime Minister Theresa May’s government said it would challenge Thursday’s High Court ruling that parliamentary approval is needed before she begins negotiations with the EU on Brexit.

The judgment that could delay or even disrupt the Brexit process, which was kicked off by a referendum in June that showed a majority of Britons wanted to leave the EU.

"This is a victory for parliamentary democracy," David Green, a lawyer for one of a group of plaintiffs, said outside the court.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs, led by investment fund manager Gina Miller, successfully argued that May does not have the authority to use an ancient legal privilege to justify her decision to start Brexit negotiations without a parliamentary vote.

"The government does not have power under the crown’s prerogative to give notice pursuant to Article 50 for the UK to withdraw from the European Union," the ruling said.

May has said she plans to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty – which sets the rules for a two-year negotiating process for a nation leaving the EU – by the end of March.

Her Conservative government said it was "disappointed by the court’s judgment" and planned to appeal to the Supreme Court, which is expected to hear the case in early December.

"The country voted to leave the European Union in a referendum approved by act of parliament," a government statement said. "And the government is determined to respect the result of the referendum."

May’s office said the government will make a longer statement on the ruling in parliament on Monday.

Speaking outside the High Court, Miller said her case was "about process, not politics."

"The result today is about all of us," she said. "It’s not about me or my team. It’s about our United Kingdom and all our futures."

Opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the ruling "underlines the need for the government to bring its negotiating terms to parliament without delay."

"Labour respects the decision of the British people to leave the European Union," Corbyn said. "But there must be transparency and accountability to parliament on the terms of Brexit."

But pro-Brexit Conservative lawmaker David Davies said the ruling reflected "unelected judges calling the shots."

"This is precisely why we voted out," Davies said on Twitter.

Another Conservative lawmaker, Crispin Blunt, called the judgment "constitutional nonsense."

"It is very important that the Supreme Court overturns [the judgment]," Blunt told the BBC.

The government insists that it does have authority to trigger Article 50 under Britain’s prerogative powers, which grant legal privilege to the government on behalf of the sovereign.

Some legal experts said Thursday’s ruling means parliament is required to approve new legislation on Brexit, but others said clarification is still needed on the issue.

"An Act of Parliament is required," lawyer George Peretz of Monckton Chambers, one of the firms representing the plaintiffs, wrote in a blog post following the ruling. (DPA)