English Blackball Pool Federation

[Signalbox]

The hearing is scheduled for 7th-11th April at Canterbury County Court.

Tribunal Tweets will be following the case…

Live tweeting sessions Abbreviations
J - His Honour Judge Parker
HH - Harriet Haynes, claimant
RW - Robin White, claimant’s barrister
CC - Colman Coyle, claimant's solicitor
EBPF - English Blackball Pool Federation
PT - Paul Thomson, defendant
AG - Anna Goodwin, defendant
SC - Sarah Crowther KC, defendants’ barristers, and
SS - Sapandeep Singh Maini-Thompson
JRL - JR Levins LLP, defendants’ solicitor
JG - James Goodwin, witness for defendant

The original thread has been deleted for “breaking Mumsnet guidelines”. Not sure why but possibly “misgendering” or possibly making it too easy to find the crowdfund @mumsnet it would be good if you could let us know so this thread can stay up. Do we have to pretend that the Claimant is female?

Yes, he just diligently goes about speaking truth to power. Telegraph readers get it completely, judging from the comments on every one of his sports articles.

They think it is all over.... it is NOW!

TodayBBC radio this morning.

Mara Yamauchi

From 08:14:30 in,
KishwerFalkner head of EHRC unequivocal about sport.

Nick Robinson: “is it simple now, that TW cannot take part in women’s sport?”

Faulkner: “yes it is….yes, sport, that is correct, that is a correct interpretation”.

I haven't stopped grinning since yesterday morning 😄

Yes me too and all my real world friends and family are …well you are right

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/17/supreme-court-tough-day-trans-people-labour

Unsurprisingly, RMW disagrees!

In contrast to the incoherent self pitying piece from RMW in the Grauniad, Susanna Rustin has written a clear and unambiguous piece about the importance of the SC's decision for society, acknowledging the tireless work of women in getting to this point:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/17/clarity-uk-supreme-court-rights-of-women-campaigners

Well I'm glad RMW has turned their legal mind to this issue. However I think I will rely on the views of NC etc given that they actually seem capable of understanding the legal situation

@MrsOvertonsWindow that is indeed a very thoughtful article. However did the Guardian let it through?

this to me seems like a reasonable effort at a middle of the road/neutral case by the guardian, unlike the other two kind of advocacy pieces linked above.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/18/if-britain-is-now-resetting-the-clock-on-trans-rights-where-will-that-leave-us

It's a valiant attempt, but she gets important details and nuances wrong. For example it is compulsory to exclude MCW from women-only spaces. That's the ruling.

I assume it's at a minimum possible to get around that with a relabelling of a space as 'women inclusive' or 'women+' or similar?

Susanna Rustin is reliably pro women's rights and always expresses things very clearly. Her recent book "Sexed: A History of British Feminism" is on my to-read pile

No. It's either a single sex space, or it's a mixed sex space.

Women+ would not qualify for the single sex exception, because it's not single sex. So it would have to admit everyone. It can't discriminate against part of a group.

"Kishwer Falkner [...] is signalling that she intends to take a hard line. The NHS should stop accommodating trans patients according to their preferred gender, she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, adding that trans women shouldn’t be using women’s loos and changing rooms, either"

That's not 'a hard line'. That's the law.

I don’t think this has been posted for a while, but NC’s “peanut test” article is brilliant:

https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2024/11/06/sex-peanuts-and-statutory-interpretation/

Thank you Madcats. That was just the tonic.

Ultimate Pool has a new policy. Entry and participation in the Women’s series is now for those born female. I think this maybe one of the organisations that Lynn Pinches was taking to tribunal.

https://x.com/ultimatepool_/status/1915089233233973566?s=46&t=ZX_bLozRqm8etdGICMcAvA

👀 I am off to read.

I love that they’re offering counselling services for people who may find this challenging 😂

I wonder if that offer is open to Lynne Pinches

Is anyone going to break it to them that TRAs would prefer a rage room where they can smash everything up? Whilst screaming F* JKR and the Supreme Court.

They say they have had expert advice that 8ball pool is a gender-affected sport and that is one of the reasons for restricting the women's category to women. I wonder if the English Blackball pool federation's legal reps could make use of this report?

Also, Ultimate Pool say that the other reason for their decision is the SC decision. Legally they didn't need it because male people with GRCs could be excluded on the grounds of GR from gender-affected sports, even if they were held to be female. But I suppose the judgement is their cover, their golden bridge.

There's a very good tweet calling for a full apology to Lynne Pinches and the other women affected, financial compensation for them and the expunging of the names of male winners from the records. Among other things.
I wholeheartedly support this call.

I am too cynical and think that the thought of losing a tribunal and paying out shed loads of money concentrated their mind. But fair do's to them - they have changed their rules within 8 days of the Supreme Court ruling. I am pleased that they listened to an expert who said that it was a 'gender' affected sport and not just listened to a Stonewall 'expert'. We really must get rid of this muddle of gender when the expert clearly meant that it's a sex affected sport.

However, since they say there was doubt about eligibility before hand, why didn't they go to law to clarify the matter?

Well no shit Batman that it is sex segregated for a reason!

I guess they had to do something as it was a PR nightmare having two men win the women’s ultimate pool final. Nicely time SC judgment.

Poorly timed for Hayne and White’s case though. Thoughts and prayers.

Nothing to do with PR. They were being sued by female pool players. It went to arbitration through ACAS before a court hearing and it was agreed to an independent report on whether pool is gender affected, and if it was shown that it was then it would be restricted to biological women only. I can't link as it's a crowd justice fundraiser. Nothing to do with the SC ruling really either but that helps them with legal cover.