The UK Government faces a wait until next year to find out whether it has won its Brexit challenge at the UK's highest court.
At the completion of four days of detailed legal argument, 11 Supreme Court justices reserved their ruling until the new year.
The referendum on the EU was never designed to be binding and its result carries no weight in law, a Supreme Court hearing over Brexit has been told.
Lord Pannick QC, representing Government challenger Gina Miller, is arguing that only a vote by MPs can trigger an exit from the bloc.
He said the June referendum which resulted in a clear majority in favour of leaving the EU was "a very important matter" but had nothing to do with the legal issue before the court.
Lord Pannick submitted that the Government "must obtain parliamentary approval" to formally kick start the process.
“It is open to Parliament to institute a referendum which does have a binding legal effect and there are many, many examples where of parliament has done so," he told justices.
"Parliament has deliberately chosen a model that does not have any binding legal effect.”
Gripping TV it may not have been but the televised four-day hearing was a box office event for fans of legal argument.
The UK's highest court has been told that a motion in Parliament does not have any bearing on the legal issue it is having to decide.
The Supreme Court is hearing an appeal to overturn a High Court ruling that said the prime minister could not trigger Article 50.