It might be argued that it is a different type of act from most acts that Parliament passes. Its whole point is to have political effects. It is not altering anybody's rights, for example, it is not the sort of legislation that Parliament passes day in, day out. It is an act which is designed to result in an event which will have enormous political significance.
The steps that then require to be taken in response to that are inevitably going to be steps taken by Government. It might decide to introduce a bill into Parliament, it might decide not to. Parliament can then respond. If there is a bill introduced, it can decide whether it is going to pass it or not; if there is no bill introduced, Parliament has the means of making the Government accountable to it for that failure.
So looking at it that way, it is an essentially political measure designed to have consequences at the political level between the political actors. If you look at it in that way, really, why is the court -- what role does the court have to play? There is not a legal issue really that arises here, other than our ensuring that the political actors are operating their roles in a lawful manner.