LANDMARK CASE
R (Miller) v. Prime Minister
[2019] UKSC 41 · Supreme Court of the United Kingdom · Constitutional law
At a glance
- Citation: [2019] UKSC 41
- Court: Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
- Area of law: Constitutional law
- In one line: Yes. The prorogation was unlawful because it frustrated Parliament's functions without justification.
1 Facts
The Prime Minister advised prorogation of Parliament for five weeks before Brexit.
2 Issue
Can courts review the advice to prorogue Parliament?
3 What the court decided
Yes. The prorogation was unlawful because it frustrated Parliament's functions without justification.
4 Why it matters
A major modern case on executive power.
5 Think about it
Compare with S.R. Bommai on reviewing political decisions.
6 Analyse it yourself
Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.
7 More cases on Constitutional law
- A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras AIR 1950 SC 27
- ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) 2 SCC 521
- Air India v. Nergesh Meerza (1981) 4 SCC 335
- Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (1981) 1 SCC 722
- Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2008) 3 SCC 1
- Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) 3 SCC 637
All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz
← Public Interest Foundation v. Union of IndiaR v. Dudley and Stephens →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.