Brexit legal challenge: Theresa May needs parliamentary approval to trigger Article 50, High Court rules – as it happened

Historic case hands Parliament opportunity to challenge, or even delay, the process of leaving the European Union

Gina Miller gives statement after High Court rules triggering article 50 must go through parliament

The High Court has ruled on whether Theresa May cannot bypass Parliament when she triggers Britain’s exit from the European Union.

Here are the latest updates:

• The Government has admitted that an Act of Parliament is likely to be needed to trigger Article 50, delaying Brexit
• Fate of Article 50 now rests with the Supreme Court
• Majority now want to remain in EU, poll finds
• ​Is this the end of Brexit?
• Bookies slash odds on Brexit not happening
• Theresa May must get approval to trigger Article 50
• What does the ruling mean?
• How the decision affected the pound
• European media brand ruling 'humiliation' for Theresa May

Campaigners have won their High Court battle over Theresa May's decision to use the royal prerogative in her Brexit strategy.

In one of the most important constitutional cases in generations, three senior judges ruled the Prime Minister does not have power to use the prerogative to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to start the UK's exit from the European Union - without the prior authority of Parliament.

The ruling against the Government was made by Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas, sitting with two other senior judges in London.

The Government has been given the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court.

Judgment: R (Miller) -V- Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union

Judgment: R (Miller) -V- Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union

Unless overturned on appeal at the Supreme Court, the ruling threatens to plunge the Government's plans for Brexit into disarray as the process will have to be subject to full parliamentary control.

Government lawyers had argued that prerogative powers were a legitimate way to give effect "to the will of the people" who voted by a clear majority to leave the European Union in the June referendum.

But the Lord Chief Justice declared: "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 Government has been given the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court but made no immediate announcement about whether it will.

[3 November 2016 11:02 · Samuel Osborne]

[3 November 2016 11:10 · Samuel Osborne]

Ukip leadership hopeful Suzanne Evans condemned the "activist judges" and suggested they should be sacked.

"How dare these activist judges attempt to overturn our will? It's a power grab & undermines democracy," she wrote on Twitter. "Time we had the right to sack them.

She added: "Predictably, the same people now quoting 'parliamentary sovereignty' are the very same people who were happy to give it away for last 40yrs."

[3 November 2016 11:19 · Samuel Osborne]

Deir Dos Santos helped bring down Theresa May's Brexit plans, despite voting to leave the EU himself.

Here's some background on the British hairdresser and claimant in this case:

[3 November 2016 11:27 · Samuel Osborne]

Ukip's only MP Douglas Carswell described the result as "shocking judicial activism".

[3 November 2016 11:28 · Samuel Osborne]

Labour MP David Lammy, who has called for a second referendum on leaving the EU, wrote:

[3 November 2016 11:28 · Samuel Osborne]

Emily Thornberry, who was previously in charge of Labour's Brexit portfolio, wrote: 

[3 November 2016 11:31 · Samuel Osborne]

The Government will give a statement to the Commons on Monday about the ruling and the appeal, Commons leader David Lidington told MPs.

He said:

I can confirm to the House that it is the Government's intention to appeal against today's judgment from the High Court.

We are, as the House is aware, in a situation where we have this judgment today and a very little while ago a judgment from the High Court of Northern Ireland which came to a completely different decision on the same subject.

So we now have the High Courts in two different parts of the United Kingdom coming to opposite conclusions on the same constitutional and legal question. So this will need to go to a higher court.

[3 November 2016 11:42 · Samuel Osborne]

Ukip donor Arron Banks, co-chairman of the Leave.EU campaign, said unelected judges had declared war on British democracy.

Parliament voted six-to-one in favour of letting the people decide. They didn't get the answer they wanted, and now they're going to use every dirty trick in the book to try to sabotage, delay or water down Brexit.

It's no surprise that the legal establishment has joined the political class in declaring war on British democracy. Why wouldn't unelected judges want to preserve an EU system where unelected elites like themselves are all-powerful?

Tony Blair let the cat out of the bag last week: the Remain campaign hasn't gone away; they don't have any respect for the 17.4 million and they will do everything in their power to reverse the public's historic victory over the Establishment.

Well, I don't think the people are going to take this lying down. Leave.EU will now be going back into full campaigning mode, and I would urge anyone who believes in democracy to sign up and join the fight.

[3 November 2016 12:15 · Samuel Osborne]

Richard Tice, co-chairman of Brexit pressure group Leave Means Leave, said: "This is disgraceful - 17.4 million people will be furious today.

"Our democracy is being damaged by an elite band of people in the legal system."

He added: "A vote in Parliament is wholly unnecessary, time-consuming and betrays the democratic will of the people."

[3 November 2016 12:36 · Andrew Griffin]

Speaker John Bercow has said that Parliament is likely to need all-night debates to allow MPs to debate Brexit fully.Tory former cabinet minister Ken Clarke warned the Government could end up dismissing the views of MPs by holding a "series of farcically constricted exchanges of views" under current arrangements.He asked Commons Leader David Lidington to consider suspending the usual time rules for sittings in order to guarantee "open-ended" debates.Mr Clarke argued this would prevent backbench MPs having only a few minutes to outline their detailed arguments.The Government has vowed to offer debates on various topics linked to EU withdrawal although it is expected they will be held within a set time period.The Commons usually finishes for the day at around 10.30pm on Mondays, 7.30pm on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and 5.30pm on Thursdays although the hours can be adjusted.Late night and all-night sittings have been a feature in Parliament's past, with Mr Lidington stating these would not be the "right way" to deal with Brexit.Speaking in the Commons, Mr Bercow said: "The House will decide its sitting hours and that's a matter for colleagues, pursuant to what (Mr Clarke) has said."I simply underline the point that I'm the servant of the House, and whatever hours the House wants to sit to debate important matters I'm very happy to be in the chair."