Liberty launches legal action against EHRC over ‘unlawful’ Code of practice consultation

[IwantToRetire]

Human rights organisation Liberty has issued legal action against the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), arguing that the Commission has breached its statutory duties by “trying to speed through sweeping changes” to its Code of practice and not giving individuals and businesses a lawful amount of time to respond to a consultation.

Liberty has said that any consultation period on the updated Code of practice should be a minimum of 12 weeks, as the previous consultation of this Code was, and has been established in law. The EHRC had initially given people just two weeks to respond to the consultation, before later extending this to six weeks. Liberty has said this is “wholly insufficient and simply does not comply with the law”.

Liberty believes that the consultation has “life-changing implications” for how trans people, as well as anyone who is perceived as not conforming to gender norms, access public services, education and social activities. It also has a wider impact on businesses and employers.

Liberty said that due to the significant impact the guidance will have on trans individuals and organisations who require more support to respond, the current consultation period is ‘so unfair as to be unlawful’.

Many of the amendments in the Code require individuals and organisations to seek external legal support, such as on changes to an organisation’s practices or in interpreting complex areas of the law, which Liberty said the current schedule for response does not suitably allow for.

UK courts have often ruled that consultation periods which impact vulnerable groups are unlawful when shorter than 12 weeks. In a recent case concerning disability benefits against the Department of Work and Pensions, the High Court ruled that an eight-week consultation was unlawful as affording vulnerable claimants “adequate time to consider, take advice upon and respond to the proposals was essential”.

In its legal challenge, Liberty also said the EHRC is in breach of the
public sector equality duty (PSED). The PSED enforces a duty on public bodies to have due regard to the need to eliminate harassment and discrimination of people with protected characteristics, such as gender reassignment, when running consultations.

Liberty said that in not taking into account the complex needs of trans people when setting the length of the consultation period, the EHRC has failed to comply with its requirements under the PSED, and that too renders the entire process unlawful.

Liberty has called for the EHRC to urgently extend the consultation period to allow vulnerable and marginalised communities enough time to respond.

A High Court judge will now decide how quickly the case should be dealt with and whether it will go ahead to a hearing.

Full statement https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/liberty-launches-legal-action-against-ehrc-over-unlawful-code-of-practice-consultation/

Parliament as well, summer recess, but only delaying the inevitable.

i noted a few comments about accommodations for trans peeps.

no law now requires that as such.

In the past i might have felt that was harsh.

now i really really do not give a fig about it, is the fault of the activists crossing a line.

and ohhhhh how happy i am

Meanwhile, the grift continues over at the GLP:

Good Law Project has filed an application for judicial review against the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and the equalities minister Bridget Phillipson.

We’ve teamed up with trans and intersex people to challenge the interim guidance rushed out by the EHRC in the wake of the transphobic judgment handed down by the Supreme Court in April.

This guidance, adopted by Phillipson, requires people to use toilets based on their “biological sex”. But we argue it’s either wrong in law, or it breaches the UK’s obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998 – and the High Court should declare this breach.

https://goodlawproject.org/legal-challenge-ehrc-guidance-is-either-wrong-in-law-or-breaches-human-rights/

"We’ve teamed up with trans and intersex people to challenge the interim guidance rushed out by the EHRC in the wake of the transphobic judgment handed down by the Supreme Court in April."

Actual people with a DSD or people who identify as intersex?

Richard Dunstan

Oh dear, looks like libertyhq grifted £13,274 from 508 members of the midwit community, just to get what Jolyon Maugham KC would call 'one hell of a beating in court'.

They never spent all that on this?! What a blooming waste of everyone's time and money.

Not only that, but it's been set out very clearly in a comprehensive 80 pp judgement and a shorter, easy to read version. Its been in the news. There is EHRC guidance.

There's no excuse, despite what The Good Law Project and Liberty may try to claim - and I note are coincidentally raising money based on the confusion that they themselves have deliberately created.

Men stay out of women's spaces. It's very straightforward.

Is ‘intersex’ defined in law?

Started a separate thread so we can discuss Joylon's legal toilet issues with the seriousness they deserve.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5350068-good-law-practice-launch-a-ehcrsupreme-court-challenge-over-toilets

I don't know. It's not one of the protected characteristics, maybe because nobody thought DSDs had anything to do with trans until the activists discovered it as a gotcha.

I can’t help but feel it’s a better way to go than a public piss protest though. At least using courts to challenge the guidance is the proper, not-behind-the-scenes way to do it, even if it is futile.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jun/06/ehrc-commissioner-calls-for-trans-people-to-accept-reduced-rights-after-years-of-lies

So pleasing to read this. Echos of what has been said here for years.

“The fact is that, until now, trans people without GRCs were being grievously misled about their legal rights,” she said. “The correction of self-ID policies and practices will inevitably feel like a loss of rights for trans people. This unfortunate position is overwhelmingly a product of the misinformation which was systematically disseminated over a long period by lobby groups and activists.”

Im sure that there is behind the scenes pressure going on to change the law.

These groups making a scene in court are probably distracting us all from the actual lobbying.

Very possible. What are Ruth Hunt and Nancy Kelley up to lately?

There is no way of getting an amendment through on the QT or by tagging it onto another piece of legislation. Those tactics are blown.

Yep. Cosy chats in the Houses of Parliament tearooms are not going to cut it now that the SC has been so clear.

and the more TRA make public spectacles of themselves blowing the whole “most vulnerable ever” narrative out of the water, the less and less chance there is that anyone with serious clout will want to be associated with them

and the more TRA make public spectacles of themselves blowing the whole “most vulnerable ever” narrative out of the water, the less and less chance there is that anyone with serious clout will want to be associated with them

This.

I bet there are loads of people absolutely fucking delighted to be able to say I'm really sorry, but my hands are tied, I totally get it, but there's nothing I can do

<and exhale>

At the hearing on Friday, Sarah Hannett KC, for Liberty, said in written submissions that the Supreme Court’s decision “has altered the landscape radically and suddenly” and potentially changes the way trans people access single-sex spaces and services.

The barrister said this included some businesses preventing trans women from using female toilets and trans men from using male toilets, as well as British Transport Police updating its policy on strip searches, which have caused “understandable distress to trans people”.

She says that like it's a bad thing. 🤔

and the more TRA make public spectacles of themselves blowing the whole “most vulnerable ever” narrative out of the water, the less and less chance there is that anyone with serious clout will want to be associated with them

Yep, Operation Let Them Speak is accelerating exponentially at this point.

And figures like Akua Reindorf are now prepared to openly state ‘other people have rights’ instead of hiding behind hand-wringing, mealy-mouthed ‘both sides’ flim-flam.

Lovely jubbly.

Trans activists just chucking things about and hoping something sticks.

Also while not many openly alert, aware and critically thinking MPs, there now are some, and the HoL equally has those alert and ready, who see the full picture and dissect the bullshit.

The days of sneaking things through are gone, that card has been played. This has never been able to stand up to sunlight and debate.

Honestly I think that is how we got here in the first place.

We are asked to believe and accomodate trans women as women in all things on the assurance that something in a man's mind makes him entirely interchangeable with people of female body.

Not just for socially gendered clothing, personality traits, interests or professions, which most people would agree with and even support as these things should not be considered the domain of one sex in the first place, but interchangeable in an actual physical sense. His body is "really" a woman's and welcome in woman-only private spaces. His hands are "really" a woman's hands so if he touches a woman for security, medicine or care reasons that woman will feel no different than when she is touched by someone female. His challenges in life are the same as they would be had his body been physically female so he needs the same social supports and opportunities. His body in sports is a woman's body competing fairly with female bodies rather than male.

That is so utterly unreasonable and batshit that everyone thought someone else, someone in authority, someone powerful enough to not have to worry about the political or financial repurcussions of being falsely painted as a bigotted sexist racist homophobe (because we all know when TRAs denouce the latest "transphobe" what they are calling on to give that word its power is their false association between T and LGB to imply "homophobe" and their false association between not limiting women because of their sex and not defining woman as a sex class to imply "sexist" and their false association between white-only and woman-only to imply "racist") would say "stop this now, this is enough".

They were all performing observance and support hoping someone else would be the fall guy and they could step out of the madness without having to say No to people who react to No in very bad ways. But no one did, and so it got worse and worse.

https://x.com/Wonkypolicywonk/status/1938254479578784165?t=ROlYRqacSOVlwfj9Poj8nw&s=19

Permission to appeal refused.
Ordered to pay costs to EHRC of £20 000

Thanks for the update.

Play stupid games 😁

How terribly sad for Liberty.
I wonder how their monthly contributors feel about £20k x 2 being wasted in pursuit of unlawful ends?