LOUD were the cheers of the pro-Brexit media and the Brexiteering public on social media when Lord Doherty pronounced yesterday morning that he was not prepared to grant an interim interdict that would have effectively suspended the Queen’s prorogation of parliament.

The Daily Mail led the way online with a headline that implied the 57 MPs and peers had lost their case completely. Social media duly erupted with exclamations of joy from Brexiteers.

They were at least premature and didn’t understand the law. Joanna Cherry QC who is leading the 75 MPs and peers in the case against prorogation took to Twitter to tell the BBC: “Could you please stop reporting that the Scottish legal challenge to #prorogation has failed. This is incorrect. Interim orders were refused today but the Court fixed a full hearing on Tuesday Sept 3.

“No decision on merits.”

It had to be explained by Sky News in particular that, in fact, Lord Doherty had merely refused to grant an interim interdict – the Scottish equivalent of an injunction – suspending prorogation. He then delivered a stunning blow to the UK Government which opposes the action by bringing forward his full hearing of the case from next Friday to Tuesday – and September 3 and 4, 2019, may well go down in history as the days when a Scots law judge overruled the British Government. Or not, as the case may be.

The Brexiteers were ecstatic at first. Someone signing as "Lagerbeer, Aberdeen, United Kingdom" commented on the Mail website: “Give it up, Remoaners. You LOST. Play your silly games all you like. You will only end up damaging yourselves psychologically. Try to move to the fifth stage of grief – you will feel better.”

Another comment stated: “Any attempts to subvert democracy must and will be thrown out as a complete farce. You remainers never ever win anything do you. Boris get us out and carry on the great work.”

It took "Robertabruis" of Southampton to point to the reality: “The Rebel Alliance has not lost the case. Lord Doherty has invited the case back to court in Edinburgh on Tuesday to hear FULL argument. So DM rumors of its demise are very much greatly exaggerated. Nothing new there then.”

The National asked a real expert on Scots law for his take on the morning’s events.

Jim Cormack, QC, partner at legal firm Pinsent Masons, told us: “Refusing an interim interdict on the basis that a full hearing can be brought forward is quite common. Given the nature and potential effects of the orders the court is being asked to grant, it is very understandable why the court prefers to bring forward a full hearing in this case."