The president of the Supreme Court has spoken out against "threats of serious violence" to people challenging the Prime Minister's authority to trigger Brexit.

Lord Neuberger made the comments in his opening remarks at the four-day hearing.

To protect the claimants, who won their High Court case last month, the Supreme Court has banned the publication of their names and addresses from now on.

He has also sought to protect the names and addresses of their children.

Lord Neuberger said: "We have made this order largely because various individuals have received threats of serious violence and unpleasant abuse in emails and other electronic communications.

"Threatening and abusing people because they are exercising their fundamental right to go to court undermines the rule of law.

"Anyone who communicates such threats or abuse should be aware that there are legal powers designed to ensure that access to the courts is available to everyone."

Lord Neuberger also told the court both parties in the case were asked if they wanted any of the 11 justices to stand down from the case.

The question was asked after widespread criticism of the judiciary from pro-Leave media outlets.

"It is right to record that, at the direction of the court, the registrar has asked all the parties involved in these proceedings whether they wish to ask any of the justices to stand down," he announced.

"All parties to the appeal have stated that they have no objection to any of us sitting on this appeal."

The court has spent the first day of the case listening to the UK Government's appeal.

The High Court ruled against the government last month. In their ruling, the three High Court judges found leaving the EU would repeal domestic law and therefore cannot be exercised by the executive without an Act of Parliament.

Downing Street argues the Prime Minister should be able to trigger Article 50 without prior approval from MPs using prerogative powers.

Acting on behalf of the government, the attorney general Jeremy Wright said the High Court had reached the "wrong" decision. It was for the Government to exercise prerogative powers in the conduct of the UK's affairs on the international plane, he argued.

Mr Wright told the 11 justices that triggering Article 50 "will not be an exercise of the prerogative right on a whim or out of the blue" but was instead part of a process which "Parliament has been fully and consciously involved".

The attorney general said the use of the prerogative powers in these circumstances would be lawful. The prerogative was not "an ancient relic" but is a contemporary "constitutional necessity".

A verdict is expected to be reached by the Supreme Court next month.