In a significant ruling, the UK Supreme Court has clarified that the terms “woman” and “sex” as defined in Britain’s Equality Act pertain specifically to biological women and biological sex.
The challenge was spearheaded by the campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS), which raised important questions about the definition of “woman” in Scottish legislation designed to ensure 50% female representation on public boards.
The crux of the dispute revolved around whether individuals who possess a gender recognition certificate (GRC), affirming their gender as female, could be classified as women under the 2010 Equality Act. FWS voiced concerns that not adhering to the traditional interpretation of sex could adversely affect sex-based rights and impact everyday single-sex services, including toilets and hospital wards. As FWS aptly put it, “We must ensure that the definition of sex remains clear and meaningful to protect our rights.”
The Scottish government’s lawyers contended during a hearing in November that individuals with a GRC are “recognised in law” as having transitioned to a different sex. Yet, the justices of the Supreme Court sided with FWS, ultimately delivering a unanimous ruling in their favor.
“The central question before us concerns the definition of ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ as articulated within the 2010 Equality Act,” noted Deputy President Patrick Hodge. He ultimately affirmed, “The terms ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.”
Outside the Supreme Court, FWS campaigners gathered to celebrate the ruling, illustrating the passionate commitment to their cause.
During the November hearing, Aidan O’Neill KC, representing FWS, argued against the Scottish ministers’ interpretation of “sex,” stating, “The proposition that sex, man, and woman in the Equality Act reflects ‘certificated sex’ is fundamentally flawed and should be rejected.”
In contrast, Ruth Crawford KC, speaking on behalf of the Scottish government, posited that individuals who transition and receive a GRC possess the same protections as those who were recorded as women at birth. “The inevitable conclusion, if FWS were to succeed, is that trans women with GRCs would face perpetual classification as men in terms of the Equality Act,” she emphasized.
By the time the Gender Recognition Act was enacted in 2004, it was noted that over 8,000 individuals across the UK had secured a GRC. This statistic underscores the findings that continue to shape the conversation surrounding gender and legal recognition.
In reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision, LGBTQ charity Stonewall expressed grave concerns regarding the implications for the trans community. “We share the deep concern surrounding the widespread ramifications of the Supreme Court’s ruling,” said Simon Blake, CEO of the charity.
The legal journey began in 2022 when FWS successfully contested the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, arguing that trans women should not be included in its definition of women. The Court of Session ruled that altering the definition of a woman in the Equality Act was unlawful and outside the Scottish Parliament’s legal scope.
Following this ruling, the Scottish government revised its statutory guidance, stating that under the 2018 Act, the definition of a woman would align with that of the Equality Act 2010, also indicating that a person holding a GRC recognizes them as a woman. FWS subsequently challenged this guidance, maintaining that the term “sex” should be interpreted in its biological context and accused the government of exceeding its authority. This challenge was dismissed by the Court of Session’s Outer House on December 13, 2022. However, the Inner House upheld that decision on November 1, 2023, while granting FWS the opportunity to appeal to the UK Supreme Court.
This ongoing legal discourse reflects the evolving conversation around gender rights and definitions within British law, illustrating how such matters continue to provoke significant public interest and debate.
Edited By Ali Musa
Axadle Times International – Monitoring.
