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 14:55 · Samuel Osborne]

Richard Tice, co-chairman of the Leave Means Leave campaign, branded the judges' decision "disgraceful".

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

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

[3 November 2016 15:02 · Samuel Osborne]

Nearly £20,000 has been pledged in a crowdfunding campaign to defend today's ruling.

The "People's Challenge to Article 50" campaign says the Government must respect the ruling it cannot use the royal prerogative to activate Article 50. 

[3 November 2016 16:30 · Andrew Griffin]

If the Brexit referendum were run again today, Remain would win instead of Leave, according to a new poll. The difference is still tiny – but enough people have changed their mind that a second referendum would swing the other way

[3 November 2016 16:45 · Andrew Griffin]

Former chancellor George Osborne has joined calls for the Government to set out its plan for Britain's future trading relationship with the EU.He told Sky News: "The question is not who makes the decision on whether we're leaving the European Union because the public have made that decision in the referendum."I think the sooner we get on to the substantive discussion in Parliament with the Government about the nature of our new relationship with Europe, how we're going to trade with these key partners of ours like Germany and France, how businesses here in Manchester and across the country are going to have the certainty so that they can invest and hire people over the next couple of years."For me these are the key issues and I would be arguing for the closest possible trading and economic relationship with Europe, outside of the EU, because we've got to respect the referendum."

[3 November 2016 16:49 · Andrew Griffin]

Senior ministers are now admitting that Brexit could be delayed because the Government will be forced to produce a full Act of Parliament to leave the EU.The Government will be forced to produce a full Act of Parliament in order to trigger Article 50 unless it can overturn the High Court ruling, David Davis has indicated.The Brexit Secretary insisted "the people are sovereign" as he defended the Government's decision to appeal against the judgment.A full Act of Parliament would require the agreement of both the Commons and the Lords and could lead to multiple attempts to amend the legislation - causing further difficulties for the Government.The Brexit Secretary said Parliament had already put the decision on leaving the European Union into the hands of voters and MPs and peers should not frustrate that.Mr Davis said the result of the referendum "must be respected", adding: "Parliament voted by six to one to give the decision to the people, no ifs or buts, and that's why we are appealing this to get on with delivering the best deal for Britain - that's the best deal for growth, the best deal for investment, the best deal for jobs."The people want us to get on with it and that is what we are going to do."

[3 November 2016 17:16 · Andrew Griffin]

Gordon Brown has a big plan to relieve the stresses on the regions caused by the Brexit vote

[3 November 2016 17:17 · Andrew Griffin]

Here's our full report into the delay that might be caused to Brexit by the fact that the Government will now have to get an Act of Parliament

[3 November 2016 17:39 · Andrew Griffin]

The Government is insisting that there'll be no change to the schedule of Brexit – Article 50 triggered in March 2017.

[3 November 2016 17:58 · Andrew Griffin]

The High Court challenge was never about blocking Brexit but holding parliament to account, one of the witnesses in the legal challenge has told The Independent