Triple

Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).

Phrase: High Court decision in R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin) | Statement: [R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, precededBy, High Court decision in R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin)]

Target entity: High Court decision in R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin)
Context triple: [R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, precededBy, High Court decision in R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2016] EWHC 2768 (Admin)]

• A. R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union chosen
  R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union is a landmark 2017 UK Supreme Court case that held the government must obtain parliamentary approval before triggering Article 50 to leave the European Union.
• B. C-621/18 Wightman and Others v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union
  C-621/18 Wightman and Others v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union is a landmark Court of Justice of the European Union judgment that clarified that a Member State may unilaterally revoke its notification to withdraw from the EU under Article 50 TEU, provided the revocation is unequivocal and follows constitutional requirements.
• C. R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd
  R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd is a landmark UK constitutional law case in which the House of Lords affirmed the supremacy of European Community law over conflicting domestic legislation and allowed for the suspension of an Act of Parliament.
• D. R (Jackson) v Attorney General
  R (Jackson) v Attorney General is a landmark 2005 House of Lords case that examined the constitutional validity of legislation enacted under the Parliament Acts and explored fundamental principles about the limits of parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law in the UK.
• E. Bancoult v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2)
  Bancoult v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) is a landmark 2008 House of Lords decision concerning the legality of the UK government's removal and exclusion of the Chagos Islanders from their homeland.
• F. None of above.
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.