For Women Scotland heading for Supreme Court

[Imnobody4]

You can read the reasons etc in For Women Scotlands crowdfunder. They are launching this review
UK Supreme Court: The Definition of Sex in the Equality Act

The Inner House of the Court of Session Judgment

We believe the Equality Act was drafted on the basis of the ordinary, common law understanding of the biological differences between the two sexes. The protected characteristic of “sex” in the Equality Act is defined as a reference to a man or a woman, where man means “a male of any age” and woman means “a female of any age”. We think it is quite clear that these are distinct and separate groups and that “woman” is not a mixed-sex category.

However, in our recent judicial review, For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers [2023] CSIH 37, the Inner House took the opposite view and decided there is a relationship between the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA) and Equality Act 2010 and held that the meaning of sex in the Equality Act incorporated the GRA framework.

The court decision stated that a person with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) in their acquired gender has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Separately, they also possess the protected characteristic of sex according to the terms of their GRC and have a presumptive right to access the single-sex services of their acquired gender.

The Supreme Court will consider a request brought by For Women Scotland (FWS) who argue there are “strong grounds” for its challenge, which will almost certainly overturn contentious Scottish government legislation if successful.Campaigners for women’s “sex-based” rights reacted with delight to the news, including Magi Gibson, the poet, who posted on X/Twitter, that it was “game on” on in the “fight for the protection of women’s rights within the UK legal system”.Dennis Noel Kavanagh, a lawyer and the director of Gay Men’s Network, said: “Getting permission to go to the Supreme Court is really hard and very rare but FWS have it. The question ‘what is a woman’ in law will now be heard by our highest court. Massive news.”

www.thetimes.com/article/088ae0ce-fba9-4b97-8331-01a32195bef5?shareToken=3ada340957f5d2af2e20b01a7c15da3b

I'll tell you after lunch

'Essentially we agree with the EHRC that only express intention to dissapply section 9.1 will disapply it'

An actual answer incoming

She is looking for the point and can't find it.

I want the judges to ask 'what is the minimum someone could do to meet the 'living as a woman' criteria?

Looking forward to The Enlightment after Lunch.

Look out she's finding an answer BEFORE LUNCH

Oh, she found it.

None of us can at this point. Maybe after lunch?

The list for 'after lunch'

This is getting so so funny

LOL

Maybe she'll have a look at a dictionary during lunch:

eat/have someone or something for lunch
idiom
US, informal
: to outdo or defeat someone or something very badly

This certainly puts paid to the Labour party's claim that the law is clear as it is, and does not need to be changed, or repealed.

What is this 9.3 stuff all about?

So too early to add filming yourself wanking in the ladies?

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/9

(3)Subsection (1) is subject to provision made by this Act or any other enactment or any subordinate legislation.

It would be great if the legal team knew

I understand (maybe) that it's to do with how the GRA interacts with other legislation

Surely the human rights argument cuys both ways - both women and transgender people have human rights?

Especially how it interacts with Adoption!!

Ah yes "The Salmon of Knowledge". The Clownfish of Knowledge not so helpful when it comes to describing how one might live as a woman.

The GRA is primarily about individual rights, whereas the equality act is about group protections. The GRA seeks to impose an individual's rights ( however they are defined) upon whole protected groups ( women)

Indeed. I'd love to ask Amnesty to square that circle

Anyone good at starting new threads?