I can;t find the full text but I believe what the court has said is that

The documents available do not show that the prorogation was imposed for a valid reason.

The summary released does not say that Johnson lied to the Queen or that prorogation is illegal per se, just that in this instance the judges came to the view that the main reason for the prorogation was to frustrate parliament which would be contrary to generally accepted standards or behaviour by public authorities (which I think is a reference to the fact that public authorities have a general duty to act reasonably but not 100% sure).

Posted By: Jim, Sep 11, 12:53:24