What’s interesting is that it really is old news. The BB article itself is fine since it’s reporting on the fact that someone else is reporting that there’s a court challenge - that’s new.
But the Telegraph article refers to “documents before the court” as if they are newly emerged evidence.
From what they quote, it appears they mean “the correspondence between the Minister and the House of Lords’ Committee which was published in the appendix to the Committee’s report”.
So, very much old news sold as “shock! New!”
