Dave,
We still await "examples of unequivocal assertions made here that the government has no case".

Sorry, but three minutes after asking for examples you said, "Alternatively we could stop quibbling about semantics and who said what."

Here are the first two I came across.

"May wants to use the power of 'Royal Prerogative' to invoke Art. 50. The High Court has judged that a law passed by parliament cannot be trumped by Royal Prerogative. That's the fundamental principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty on which our entire constitution is based, and rightly so.
The legislation clearly stated that the referendum was 'advisory' only. A promise made by the Prime Minister cannot, and does not, change that piece of legislation. Only parliament can do that."

"I find the governments position rather akin to a used car salesman who has been found out clocking his vehicles. He is taken to court for misleading people but his argument is that the mileage on the car is what he promised it to be, regardless of the truth. It would be laughable if it wasn't going on at such a high level."