Supreme Court holds that EqA 2010 terms ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ refer to biological sex (For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers)

Table of contents

• Background
• Judgment
• The Legal Background
• Interpretation of the GRA 2004
• Interpretation of the EqA 2010
• Protection from discrimination
• Comment
• Dr Michael Foran, Lecturer in Public Law, University of Glasgow
• Joanne Moseley, Lead Practice Development Lawyer, Irwin Mitchell LLP

Article summary

The UK Supreme Court has unanimously held that the terms ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ’sex' in the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) refer to biological sex rather than ’certificated sex'. the court held that individuals with Gender Recognition Certificates (GRC) do not fall within their acquired gender's definition under EqA 2010. The judgment clarifies that trans people remain protected from discrimination through gender reassignment provisions and can claim sex discrimination if perceived as their acquired gender. The court determined a biological interpretation was necessary for coherent application of EqA 2010 provisions across areas including single-sex spaces, sports participation and pregnancy rights. Dr Michael Foran and Joanne Moseley comment on the implications of the judgment.