GLP v EHRC judgement is coming tomorrow

[DownhillTeaTray]

Listing in the Administrative Court for tomorrow not before 11am: read out of the judgment in our challenge to the EHRC Interim Guidance.

https://bsky.app/profile/goodlawproject.org/post/3meo6ow7ow22k

It sounds a lot like a school report I got when I was about 14.

@StillSpartacus While this does not help you directly you could point out to the university that it is acting unlawfully in not providing single sex toilets for staff. You could also bring a claim for unlawful discrimination as they are a service provide who has opted to provide a service but are lying about it being single sex.

In the unlikely event that you have a sensible MP complain to them. You could also consider a notification to the Office for Students, I have no idea if that is captured. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-students/understanding-students/notifications/

Where's the laugh emoji when you need it? 😁

You can almost hear the iteration…

judge: I’ll write “not realistic “
internal voice : but some people behave like that
j: ok so “not realistic behaviour “
iv: clownfish?
j: not realistic for human behaviour?
iv: keep going….
j: ffs

Any empathy I had has evaporated over the course of the last 6 years. Due in large part to the bullying, threatening and coercive nature of TRA's. The ludicrous denial of biological reality didn't help either.

Maybe their misogynistic movement should direct its anger/hatred towards the people who lied to them. And give the rest of us a break.

Yes, one of the complainants was an 'intersex' woman who should have been advised to challenge her manager's toilet rules (I'm sure her union would have backed her) and JM roped her into this farrago instead. Unethical.

Yep agree entirely. Women didn’t sell this lie. Leave us out of it thanks.

Men can sort it out and leave women and children alone at this point.

Am I alone in thinking that a Mount Rushmore style monument should be built for these and others who have stood up to be counted?

The mental image of Naomi Cunningham's steely, be-spectacled face staring out unbowed by time or weather makes me tear up a bit

I'm not sure that we have a rock face big enough for them all.

Exactly. He is trying to give the TRAs a little glimmer of hope. One more big push...nearly there... Just another £20 donation

Lads, calm down, everyone knows you're trans. No outing needed!

Unless “intersex woman” actually means trans identified male, a lot of these men claim that.

We should erect a statue to Jolyon, with cases like this he's done more than most to help the GC cause.

OMG I am so confused.

I thought the EHRC guidance was ment to clary things and I can't be the only one thinking its guidance could be a lot clearer?

Busy now but hope to have some time later this evening to properly digest everything.

I've a 2.1 LLB and I'm stupidly confused by the EHRC guidance.

I'd also like to know why no one is taking action against the EHRC who's dodgy Stonewall written 2011 guidance allowed 80% of the gender shit show to take so much ground away from women/girls ILLEGALLY. Everyone gone very quite about that.

EHRC needs to spell things out in the guidance super clearly & I can't see that they do this. Surely the idea is business/services can read, understand & implement then law via the EHRC guidance without having to individually consult expensive lawyers who all have different opinions, often swayed by ideology, & this is very clearly not the case.

IMO the EHRC continue to fail at their job.

I have seen it referred to as the good laugh project

The judgment explains why this isn't a rational concern and dismisses it.

And yes, nothing stopping 'allies' using those spaces in support if that aids those concerns.

ChatGPT says:

A High Court judge has ruled that the Good Law Project (GLP) does not have the legal “standing” to bring its latest challenge in its own name.

The case concerns guidance issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) about single-sex spaces, following a recent Supreme Court ruling. GLP sought to challenge that guidance through judicial review, arguing it was legally flawed and potentially discriminatory.

However, in a decision handed down by the High Court of England and Wales, Mr Justice Swift ruled that GLP itself does not have a sufficient legal interest in the matter to act as a claimant. In judicial review cases, claimants must show they are directly affected by the decision they are challenging. The court found that, as an organisation, GLP was not personally or directly impacted by the EHRC’s guidance.

Importantly, the judge did not dismiss the entire case. The individual claimants — who argue they are personally affected by the guidance — were granted permission to continue their challenge. The ruling therefore focuses on who is entitled to bring the case, not on whether the EHRC’s guidance is lawful.
“Standing” is a procedural requirement designed to ensure courts hear cases brought by those genuinely affected, rather than by groups with only a general interest in a policy. While courts sometimes allow public interest organisations to participate, that is not automatic.

In short, the High Court has said GLP cannot act as a claimant in its own right, but the legal challenge itself will proceed through the individual claimants. The substance of the dispute over the EHRC guidance has yet to be decided.

Yes, this, I don't understand why there are undies in a twist about being outed, surely, surely all the allies will be using the gender neutral loos too? Won't they?🤔

I don’t know if I’m missing something here but GLP and TRAs wailing about being outed….

These are biological men using the women’s toilets who have decided to give themselves the label of trans woman. Are they seriously suggesting that when they use the women’s toilets none of us can tell they’re actually men? They really think we’re fooled??

And if they have to use the disabled toilet, we’ll suddenly realise they weren’t actually women after all??

is that what’s being suggested?

ChatGPT getting it wrong again. Where's the "intelligence" hiding in AI?

The judge said the claimants had standing but that's why he dealt with the arguments - and they lost on all of them. edit for typo

It's my understanding that the GMC can still pursue a Fitness to Practise case even if the doctor voluntarily surrenders registration.

I thought the Guardian was pretty poor (as always). Libby Brooke is the resident TRA, isn't she? I think there is some attempt at balance because they can't just ignore the statement from the EHRC, but why have wheeled out Melanie Phillips again, who increasingly just comes across as a disgruntled ex-civil servant with a chip on her shoulder. And why is she saying that this judgement doesn't bring clarity? Like the GLP, she is just trying to muddy the waters so people can continue breaking the law.

I think the Guardian have also been very selective in their reporting of the judgment, but I guess credit needs to be given for the fact that they lead with the fact that it was a loss for the GLP.

It not being a rational concern only works if the person with the concern is rational. This is an interesting read, and I'd love people to pull it to pieces for me if they've got time and the knowledge. can-sg.org/2024/01/21/puberty-blockers-and-teenage-brain-development/#:~:text=According%20to%20a%20review%20of%20the%20literature%2C,IQs%20in%20patients%20treated%20with%20puberty%20blockers.

I'm surprised there has been nothing in the Times yet. I know the BBC usually take their time.

I had my doubts.

I'd rather read a 1000 line SQL statement than a paragraph of legalese ....

i'm still confused about this bit.

I realise it might be him musing about the possibility of this, if the likelihood of that happens, when there's a smidge of a chance of the other being in place, but still...

(For the purposes of the EA 2010 the lavatory would be mixed-sex, but for the purposes of the Claimants' submission in this case it would still be labelled "women".)

So if they had a toilet that was for women and transwomen, it would, according to the law be mixed sex, but could be labelled women?

I realise that transwomen are going to leap at this, because it's validation. Even if women have a single sex toilet elsewhere, one labelled women that TW can use and other men can't, is very validating.

But, it's a nightmare for women.

They go to a toilet marked women, believing in the legal comfort of it being single sex, and there are men in it? Plus there's the whole fucking reanimated bollocks of what constitutes trans.

Realistically, how is this ever going to work? Women might have a space they can go to of their own, but they're not going to know which one if they're both labelled women??