A LANDMARK judgment in the High Court in London yesterday is a major setback for Theresa May's plans to start Brexit negotiations by the end of March next year and exit the European Union by 2019.
Judges ruled that the British prime minister does not have the power to use the royal prerogative to trigger Article 50 without the authority of parliament.
This was a momentous judgment which, if it is upheld, will have far-reaching political implications.
Essentially it is a robust affirmation of parliamentary sovereignty, something angry Brexiteers who have lambasted the verdict seem to have overlooked.
The British government has declared it will appeal to the Supreme Court with the case likely to be heard in December.
If they fail to overturn the decision it will mean Mrs May will have to get the approval of MPs which will undoubtedly be a fraught process.
The feeling is that many Leave MPs will accept the outcome of the referendum but will use any debate on Article 50 as a chance to get the government's plans into the open and mitigate the impact of a hard Brexit.
Even if the judgment is overturned the government will be under intense pressure to detail its proposals.
Scotland and Wales are also likely to try to use these events to their advantage but the picture is less clear here where Arlene Foster is sticking to Mrs May's policy without knowing what the full implications will be for Northern Ireland.
The government has tried to dampen speculation of an early general election but given the Tory party's slender majority and the disarray in Labour, a snap poll will undoubtedly be a consideration.
So we are in for yet another period of uncertainty, something that has been the hallmark of the Brexit issue thus far.
A pause in the headlong rush to trigger Article 50 and a chance for MPs to examine what all this will mean for the UK and for the regions should be regarded as a positive development and not something to be feared.
