Good Law Practice launch a EHCR/Supreme Court challenge over toilets

[fromorbit]

After raising over 418K it turns out the GLP's amazing legal case is all about toilets. Details:

https://archive.is/TWRTl

No doubt it will fail like most of their previous legal cases.

Previous thread:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5336208-good-law-project-suing-the-ehrc-and-bridget-phillipson-letter-before-action?page=1

Empathising with delusional thinking, is not empathy it is cruel, and dishonest.

i also think a lot of trans people channel their feelings into wanting what they can’t have and hating people who stand in their way, who are mostly women, because it stops them having to deal with the reality of their lives.

Is this the same case that Sex Matters has just been given permission to intervene in?

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/sex-matters-intervenes-on-single-sex-services-guidance/?mc_cid=5ca07ebb77

Yes, that’s right. TRA Reddit and BlueSky will be pleased.

This is happening tomorrow isn't it?
Busy week for him as I think he'll be getting his letter before action from Sarah Phillimore too. Not to mention his wife being coms director of a water company that recently dumped millions of plastic pellets on Camber beach (no GLP media posts strangely enough, even though taking on Big Water is one of their favourite grifts)

Yes I think it is tomorrow. Is anyone going to live tweet do you know?

Just for info - how the GLP is promoting its case
https://www.scenemag.co.uk/good-law-project-in-high-court-this-week-challenging-ehrcs-interim-guidance/

Is this about this case? Or does it refer to another one?

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/ehrc-comment-judicial-review-challenge-brought-good-law-project

(Its not dated)

It's the same case. They've been to court but the case was deferred until now. I think that the problem at the original hearing was that GLP hadn't brought a legally arguable case

Thanks. They should really have dated it or linked to something.

I think they’ve rolled up a decision on whether the case should be heard at all with hearing the case, so as I understand it there will first be arguments to consider the case’s legitimacy, then if granted the substantive evidence will be heard etc.

That's how I understand it.

Although I'm not clear how the case will run. Do they hear the evidence about whether there's a proceedable case, make a decision them move onto the substantive evidence if they decide it will proceed or do they hear all evidence before making a decision whether there is a case to be made.

Not sure, I guess we will find out tomorrow!

I've just seen that TT are asking for permission.

I'm pasting from.Sara Morrison v Belfast Film Festival, but Nick Wallis isn't as prolific as TT.

I'll see what I can do.

From TT

We are at the Royal Courts of Justice to report on the Good Law Project vs the King, et all. We are hoping for permission to live tweet, if not we will report as a narrative at breaks.

Our previous coverage of the preliminary hearing can be found here:
https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/good-law-project-and-others-vs-the

The Good Law Project (GLP) and 3 other persons not identified (OPs) are seeking a judicial review of the Interim Update issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on 25 April 2025. At the previous hearing.

Mr Justice Swift did not grant permission for judicial review. However, he gave the claimants advice on how to revise their pleadings and resubmit them. Today is the first day or a 2 day 'roll up' hearing combining permission for the JR with the JR hearing, if necessary.

From TT

The parties are in the courtroom (Court 1 RCJ) and the spectator section is full. There are a number of parties; the GLP, EHRC, Bridget Phillipson as the Women and Equalities Minister and several intervenors including Sex Matters.

There are a number of barristers, we are unlikely to get all the names correct, especially if we live tweet but will do our best. We are wondering about the correct collective noun for barristers.

Still waiting on permission to live tweet.

Abbreviations, just in case.
J – Mr Justice Swift
JC - Joanne Clement KC, EHRC
AG – Alex Goodman, KC, GLP
SS – Single sex
TW – transwoman, male iden(fies as a woman
TM – transman, female, iden(fies as a man
EA – Equality Act 2010

1992 Regs – 1992 Workplace Regula(ons
HRA – Human Rights Act
EHRC – Equality & Human Rights Commission
ECHR – European Conven(on on Human Rights
GRA – Gender Recogni(on Act
PMOALA – propor(onate means of achieving a legi(mate aim
MLF – my learned friend

Are you going to do the honours, Myrtle? Hope the antibiotics are doing their stuff.

I'm going to try because Nick Wallis is also tweeting a tribunal with Naomi Cunningham for Sara Morrison v Belfast Film Festival.

All good mostly but a slightly worrying blood test yesterday. The multidisciplinary team are meeting today and I have a call tomorrow to let me know if they want more tests.

From TT

SM - Sex Matters, human rights charity
Scheduled start is 10:30 - standing room only in the courtroom now.

From TT

We have been refused permission to live tweet. The GLP objected on the grounds of the anonymity order in place related to 3 of their IPs. We will take notes and report.
Will publish at first break.

So much for open justice.

Presumably even the Beeb have sent a reporter to court today.

Tribunal Tweets cannot live tweet. They will provide updates in the breaks.

<MyrtleLion breathes a huge sigh of relief, coupled with mild sorrow, and wipes the sweat from her brow>

/Thanks Myrtle and TT!

How surprising GLP don't want people observing their performance.

Thanks @MyrtleLion . And for the other thread!

If they can't live tweet, can they effectively scribe what they would usually then produce the whole lot in the break?

We are wondering about the correct collective noun for barristers.

😁