The decision will be a landmark, even if the specific consequences on the continuation of discussions with the Twenty-Seven were not yet apparent on Tuesday 24 September: in the morning, in a much awaited ruling, the British Supreme Court ruled that the decision of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to suspend the British Parliament for 5 weeks until the Queen's speech on 14 October was "unlawful".
The Court relied in particular on the fact that there was no relevant justification for the Prime Minister's decision, which had been described as a "coup" or "constitutional outrage" by House of Commons Speaker John Bercow.
The latter was quick to react on 24 September and announced that he had convened Parliament on 25 September at 11 a.m. to resume work.
A decision that the Commission did not want to comment on, claiming that it was a matter of "internal affairs" for the United Kingdom, as Natasha Bertaud, the institution's spokesperson, said. On Tuesday afternoon, the technical meeting scheduled for Wednesday 25 with the British negotiator, David Frost, was, in any case, still on the agenda.
For his part, European Parliament President David Sassoli welcomed an "important" decision on his Twitter account. "Any Brexit agreement needs to be approved by both UK and EU Parliament, so proper democratic scrutiny on both sides of the Channel is essential". The Belgian, Guy Verhofstadt, spoke of "great relief".
For the Commission, the interlocutor will always be the British Government and Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The British prime minister challenged the Supreme Court's vision and, according to some British media, he might call for a second suspension of Parliament in the near future. In any case, he said that this ruling would make it "even more difficult" to reach an agreement with the EU.
Lady Hale, the Supreme Court President, explained that "the decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification". Noting that the decision of the 11 judges was "unanimous", she also clarified that the ruling was not about - "when and on what terms" the UK intended to leave the EU - but only about the decision to suspend Parliament.
"This prolonged suspension of parliamentary democracy took place in quite exceptional circumstances", the Court stated, and "Parliament, and in particular the House of Commons as the elected representatives of the people, has a right to a voice in how that change comes about. The effect upon the fundamentals of our democracy was extreme" and "no justification for taking action with such an extreme effect has been put before the court". (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)