Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Good Law Project v the EHRC in court today

66 replies

Another2Cats · 30/07/2025 12:21

Tribunal Tweets are not live tweeting this but will be updating during breaks.

There does appear to be one person live tweeting though and I found her latest tweet interesting:

"The EHRC says the new ETA for the draft Code of Practice is the end of December and suggests that the wordings in the Interim Update will not be included in the draft Code."

https://bsky.app/profile/reactiveashley.bsky.social/post/3lv6he5d5422b

I'm sure that there will be a lot more coming out when TT start reporting

OP posts:
illinivich · 31/07/2025 13:05

And single sex spaces cannot be redefined as single gender spaces without having to reassess why they are needed and if they are fit for purpose.

Single sex spaces can look at body differences and risks based on sex. I dont know how anyone would begin to decide which genders need separate facilities from which other genders.

RedToothBrush · 31/07/2025 13:48

Reminder.

These are SUPPOSED to be professional, qualified and reputable lawyers taking on a legal case against the EHRC.

We've been saying they are a bunch of grifters, spouting utter incoherent bollocks which is legally illiterate.

And now a judge has said "Get your act together and come up with a coherent case and I'll consider it, otherwise you can piss off".

When IS the penny going to drop amongst activists who quote these Muppets as if they are the gospel?!

Ereshkigalangcleg · 31/07/2025 13:56

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 31/07/2025 12:47

It cannot simultaneously be a breach of trans women's human rights to have to use the same toilets as male people, and not a breach of women's human rights to have to use the same toilets as male people.

🎯

Ereshkigalangcleg · 31/07/2025 13:57

Which is why their main argument is about being “outed” which is hilarious in and of itself.

InjuryMyArse · 31/07/2025 14:03

Someone on twitter has called it The Good Laugh Project.

MassiveWordSalad · 31/07/2025 14:12

Leaving aside everything else, if the GLP are questioning the interim guidance in November and the Code of Practice is expected in December, won’t the court just tell them to sling their hook?

MarieDeGournay · 31/07/2025 14:21

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 31/07/2025 12:47

It cannot simultaneously be a breach of trans women's human rights to have to use the same toilets as male people, and not a breach of women's human rights to have to use the same toilets as male people.

Very well said, MissScarlet, I'm going to borrow that thank you!

I hate love people like you who can sum up in a few well-chosen words and perfectly-formed, succinct sentences what it takes me paragraphs to say.Grin

Ereshkigalangcleg · 31/07/2025 14:52

MassiveWordSalad · 31/07/2025 14:12

Leaving aside everything else, if the GLP are questioning the interim guidance in November and the Code of Practice is expected in December, won’t the court just tell them to sling their hook?

I guess they are hoping for a judgment which will be binding on the CoP, not sure how likely that is.

MassiveWordSalad · 31/07/2025 14:56

Ereshkigalangcleg · 31/07/2025 14:52

I guess they are hoping for a judgment which will be binding on the CoP, not sure how likely that is.

Show quote history

Thanks @Ereshkigalangcleg

I suppose I’m on a hiding to nothing wondering about the reasoning of the GLP 🤷🏼‍♀️

IAdefinitelyNAL but I can’t imagine them getting what they want.

RedToothBrush · 31/07/2025 15:50

MassiveWordSalad · 31/07/2025 14:56

Thanks @Ereshkigalangcleg

I suppose I’m on a hiding to nothing wondering about the reasoning of the GLP 🤷🏼‍♀️

IAdefinitelyNAL but I can’t imagine them getting what they want.

Show quote history

They want it ALL. All on their own terms and to suit them and to hell with anyone else. Anything else is not enough.

They are toddlers.

Pluvia · 01/08/2025 11:04

fromorbit · 31/07/2025 07:07

Remember the money fundraised by GLP goes mainly to pay for salary for multiple legal staff inside the organisation including Joylon. The key thing is they generally lose the cases. GLP get paid to be legal hobbyists. They don't have to have good cases, it doesn't matter if they win.

In fact by consistently losing they push the envelope against them by demonstrating the law is against them and undermining their arguments in the wider legal profession. The 500,000 GLP raised to fight the SC ruling is going to be wasted on nothing much.

It is the best possible outcome. If that money had been spent on political lobbying for instance it would be far more dangerous. Or worse spent on medical malpractice like Mermaids.

If we wanted to deliberately create an organisation to undermine the trans position inside the UK then you could not do better than creating GLP.

Interesting reframing. So Jolyon is on our side while pretending not to be and making loads of money from the people he claims to support...

Browniesforbreakfast · 01/08/2025 11:14

Jolyon is on the side of Trans the same way Nicola Sturgeon was on the side of Scottish independence.

NotfinanciallyresponsibleforyouSadTimes · 01/08/2025 17:20

Mmmnotsure · 31/07/2025 00:50

I enjoyed this snippet of what the session might have been like. This is at the end; the judge has spent much of the time wading through the GLP submissions.
J = judge
JC = barrister, KC, for EHRC
AG = barrister, KC, for GLP

[The judge starts off by suggesting dates for the hearing]...

JC – has conflict
J – how about 10 Nov,
AG – is it possible to bring forward
J – the first date I could offer is self-explanatory
AG – but perhaps in October
J – I know what forward means, not possible

A good signal that the J knows he is dealing with an idiot from the Good Laugh Project. Off to a good start 😂 first impressions and all that.

chilling19 · 01/08/2025 17:26

RedToothBrush · 31/07/2025 13:48

Reminder.

These are SUPPOSED to be professional, qualified and reputable lawyers taking on a legal case against the EHRC.

We've been saying they are a bunch of grifters, spouting utter incoherent bollocks which is legally illiterate.

And now a judge has said "Get your act together and come up with a coherent case and I'll consider it, otherwise you can piss off".

When IS the penny going to drop amongst activists who quote these Muppets as if they are the gospel?!

This ⬆️

Mochudubh · 01/08/2025 18:18

So, GLP have handed in their homework submission and the teacher judge has taken one look and said "This looks like you did it on the bus this morning, take it away and do it properly".

Is that right?

GreenUp · 01/08/2025 19:06

MassiveWordSalad · 31/07/2025 14:12

Leaving aside everything else, if the GLP are questioning the interim guidance in November and the Code of Practice is expected in December, won’t the court just tell them to sling their hook?

From what I understand, the GLP's case is multi-pronged.

They want the judge to rule that the EHRC's interim update is unlawful.

However if the judge says the update is lawful, then the GLP want the judge to say the EHRC's update is incompatible with trans people's convention rights under Article 8 and Article 14 of the Human Rights Act.

Interestingly - this is similar to the argument that Jane Russell put forward in the Harriet Haynes English Blackball Pool Federation case.

Barrister Barbara Rich snipped the key parts of the judgment showing why the judge in that case rejected permission to appeal based on the Article 8 and Article 14 arguments.

https://x.com/BarbaraRich_law/status/1951258555979301005?t=EkA9Dwrex--qHJzgfh--cg&s=19

Ps. IANAL so may not be understanding this correctly 😀.

https://x.com/BarbaraRich_law/status/1951258555979301005?s=19&t=EkA9Dwrex--qHJzgfh--cg

New posts on this thread. Refresh page