Currently waiting for the latest round of Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers to begin (remotely). She seeks summary judgment I won’t be live-tweeting for two days but I’ll be keeping an eye on it.

My backgrounder (for subscribers to my blog) here: rozenberg.substack.com/p/duchess-seek… Duchess is represented by Ian Mill QC, Justin Rushbrooke QC, Jane Phillips and Jessie Bowhill.

Assange: reporters following the bail hearing remotely can now see court 1 of Westminster Magistrates’ Court. Hearing is due to start at 1000 but there are sometimes delays.

I hope to be live-tweeting, as before. My backgrounder here: rozenberg.substack.com/p/assange-what… Assange has not yet been brought into the dock. He will be represented, as before, by Edward Fitzgerald QC and Mark Summers QC (remotely). Court now in session.

Assange: waiting online with other journalists for a ruling from District Judge Vanessa Baraitser. Although the hearing is taking place at the Old Bailey, this is a sitting of Westminster Magistrates’ Court. It is not a trial. The losing side may appeal against the DJ’s ruling. Reporters covering the Assange hearing remotely can now see and hear the courtroom. Edward Fitzgerald QC is asking for a glass of water. The dock is currently empty.

I hope to live-tweet some of the lockdown regulations challenge hearing that starts at 1030. Claimants include Simon Dolan, a businessman. Defendants include Matt Hancock, health secretary. Claimant’s counsel is Philip Havers QC. Defendant’s counsel is Sir James Eadie QC. Claimants apply for permission to judicially review the lawfulness of the coronavirus regulations and guidance that have caused the closure of schools for the vast
majority of children in England and which continue to deprive the great majority of children of
an education.

I am hoping to live-tweet the procedural hearing today in Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers. It’s not being streamed onto a public website but the High Court cause list indicates how people can access the remote hearing. I’m currently waiting to be let in. It’s a privacy claim and is being heard in the Chancery Division Intellectual Property List by Mr Justice Warby. He is expected to reserve judgment until a later date. There are no witnesses at this stage.

The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales has told all judges that they will be using technology to conduct business which even a month ago would have been unthinkable.  Final hearings and hearings with contested evidence very shortly will be conducted using technology (THREAD) Otherwise, says Lord Burnett of Maldon, “there will be no hearings and access to justice will become a mirage. “Even now we have to be thinking about the inevitable backlogs and delays … that will build to an intolerable level if too much court business is simply adjourned.”

Good morning from the @UKSupremeCourt. Lady Hale is expected to deliver a summary of the court’s judgment in the Miller/Cherry prorogation appeals at 1030. This will be live-streamed and televised. I’m in the court media room and plan to live-tweet (threaded) what’s said in court The oral summary of the judgment normally lasts for only a few minutes. Written copies of the full judgment will then be posted online. There are no advance copies for the media (or, we are told, the parties) so the first anyone knows the result will be when Lady Hale gives it.

It will be interesting to see whether the justices ask Sir James Eadie QC the questions they put to Lord Keen QC yesterday about how the PM would respond to a declaration that his advice to HM was unlawful. Might he seek to recall parliament and prorogue once again? It’s also worth remembering that Sir James Eadie’s arguments were successful at the High Court in London a couple of weeks ago. Three senior judges held that the claim brought by Lord Pannick QC on behalf of Gina Miller was ‘not justiciable in Her Majesty’s courts”.

Pannick: what if another PM wanted to prorogue for six months or a year? Dicey, relied on by the PM, is not an answer. We only seek a declaration that the advice to HM was unlawful —because the PM has promised to comply with any declaration. Pannick completes his submissions. If he can’t win this case, nobody can. But it’s very difficult to read the court, particularly at this early stage. We’ll hear the government this afternoon.

Good morning. I’m not at the @UKSupremeCourt but I plan to follow the livestream all day and live-tweet the arguments. The court is hearing separate appeals that raise similar issues: is the PM’s advice to HM to prorogue parliament justiciable? And, if so, was it lawful? (thread) It’s a three-day hearing so there won’t be any indication of the result before Friday. I’d say a result next week is more likely, perhaps will full reasons to follow. Today the 11 justices will hear from the appellants, who lost in the national courts. Tomorrow, the respondents.

Good morning from R (Miller) v Prime Minister, in the High Court of England and Wales (Divisional Court). Gina Miller represented by Lord Pannick QC. PM represented by Sir David Eadie QC. Judges are Lord Burnett CJ, Sir Terence Etherton MR, Dame Victoria Sharp President QBD. Lady Chakrabarti (intervener) is in court. Sir John Major (intervener) is not. All interveners are making written submissions only.

Tommy Robinson hearing resumes at 1030. New readers start here: 5rb.com/news/divisiona… Richard Furlong for Stephen Yaxley-Lennon will argue that Dame V Sharp, president QB division, and Mr Justice Warby should dismiss the attorney general’s application to commit YL for contempt. YL recalled to give evidence. Caldecott QC asks him about a new sworn statement made overnight. It relates to when he learned that there was no indication displayed at Leeds Crown Court that there were reporting restrictions in force.