While we're waiting for tribunal tweets, I saw someone on Bluesky who attended this morning has posted the following:
1/ Today at 10:30am, High Court in London, Court 1, before Mr Justice Swift, R (Good Law Project, on the application of) v Equality and Human Rights Commission, a rolled-up hearing for judicial review of EHRC’s “interim update” (Day 1 of 2)
No live reporting, sorry.
2/ The morning hearing opened with the claimant’s counsel, Alex Goodman KC, outlining in the witness statements how the EHRC “interim update” had affected each of the three claimants, both in their employment and in their daily lives.
3/ The three claimants, who are trans and/or intersex, each have different circumstances and varying levels of openness about their identities at work. A key point is how the guidance has influenced, and continues to influence, not only their employment but also their own behaviour.
4/ There is fear and anxiety, and counsel submits that this means the challenge is not academic.
He then went through the guidance line by line, explaining what a reasonable reading of it would mean.
5/ CORRECTION: it was Dan Stilitz KC this morning.
The claimant took issue with the guidance, which states that trans-inclusive gendered toilets are unlawful, a position the EHRC now supports in their skeleton arguments.
6/ The claimant contends that providing trans-inclusive gendered toilets is not direct or indirect discrimination against a cis person. There was some discussion with the judge about the precise content of the EHRC’s interim update, but it is clear that the EHRC now takes a position.
7/ Stilitz says the guidance, to an average reader, like a pub landlord or employer, concerns how different toilet access arrangements may “pan out”. And says the guidance mandate both direct and indirect discrimination against trans people.
bsky.app/profile/reactiveashley.bsky.social/post/3m5ghlozfzk2y