Appeal planned after court dismisses case aimed at forcing PM to request a Brexit extension
Legal action aimed at forcing Boris Johnson to send a letter requesting a Brexit extension has been dismissed by Scotland's highest civil court - but petitioners on the case will appeal the decision.
Those behind the case - [made to the the Court of Session in Edinburgh](http://Court to be urged to order Boris Johnson to abide by Benn Act) - wanted to force the Prime Minister to abide by the so-called Benn Act, a law recently passed which demands a Brexit extension to prevent no-deal.
The court said there was no need for it to make a legal order because it accepts Mr Johnson will abide by the law and "has affirmed that he intends to do so".
In the court judgment, Lord Pentland said both the PM and the government had given "unequivocal assurances" that they would comply with the Benn Act.
As a result the judge stated: "I am not persuaded that it is necessary for the court to grant the orders sought or any variant of them."
But Joanna Cherry QC, an SNP MP behind the legal action, said she doesn't "trust him to keep his promise" and will appeal the court ruling.
"I'm concerned that the court's faith in the prime minister may be misplaced and that's why we'll be lodging an appeal."
She added: "Boris Johnson doesn't take what he says to the courts seriously and I don't trust him to keep his promise."
Lord Pentland warned that if Mr Johnson failed to comply with the legislation, it could damage the "mutual trust" that exists between the courts and politicians.
Documents submitted to the court on behalf of Boris Johnson were read out on Friday, in which he made it clear he will not attempt to frustrate the so-called Benn Act.
Regardless of the court's interpretations, Liberal Democrats leader Jo Swinson told ITV News opposition parties continue to meet in order to discuss tactics, should Mr Johnson seek no deal.
She added: "What's politically unclear is whether the prime minister thinks there is some merit in being seen to disobey the law.
"These are astonishing times and so of course on a cross-party basis we will continue to meet to make sure that we can enforce that law."
Arcuri refuses to say whether she had affair with Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson's Brexit offer 'contains too much uncertainty'
The legislation, passed by Westminster last month, requires the Prime Minister to ask the EU for a Brexit extension to January 31 if Parliament does not agree to any withdrawal deal Number 10 may come back with by October 19.
Legal action – led by businessman Vince Dale, SNP MP Ms Cherry and Jolyon Maugham QC – was launched at the Outer House of the court.
It seeks to create an order which would force Mr Johnson to send the letter and prohibits him from frustrating the Act’s purpose.
This includes banning him from asking EU member states to deny the letter’s request or by sending an additional letter which contradicts it.
Aidan O’Neill QC, representing the campaigners behind the legal action, claimed Mr Johnson’s previous statements go against what he has said to the court through the documents.
He referred to promises made by the Prime Minister that he would rather be “dead in a ditch” than send a letter requesting an extension, and that the UK will leave on October 31 “do or die”.
But Lord Pentland said statements were "clearly not intended to be taken as conclusive statements of the Government's understanding of its legal obligations".
The judge said that lawyers for the government had "made their intentions entirely clear" that they "would comply fully with all the requirements" of the Benn Act, and would "not seek to frustrate its purpose".
As a result he added that "there was, therefore, no need for the court to pronounce any order".