The Supreme Court clarified that transgender individuals are still protected under the Equality Act 2010, just under different categories.
UK Supreme Court: “Terms 'man,' 'woman,' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological sex” — Landmark Judgment, latest News:
The UK Supreme Court on Wednesday delivered a landmark judgment clarifying the definitions of man, woman, and sex under the Equality Act 2010. The court ruled that legal protections for women under the Act apply only to biological females, and do not include trans women. It emphasized that although the word “biological” is not explicitly used in the law, its meaning is clear from the plain language of the Act, which refers to physical (biological) characteristics.
In its judgment, the court stated, "The Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal. It holds that the terms 'man,' 'woman,' and 'sex' in the EA 2010 refer to biological sex."
Justices Lord Hodge, Lady Rose, and Lady Simler delivered a joint judgment, with all other justices in agreement.
The court further explained, "The definition of sex in the EA 2010 makes clear that the concept of sex is binary — a person is either a woman or a man. Persons who share that protected characteristic for the purposes of the group-based rights and protections are persons of the same sex. Provisions that refer to protection for women necessarily exclude men."
Although the Act doesn’t use the word “biological,” the court said the ordinary meaning of the terms aligns with biological characteristics, which are assumed to be self-explanatory.
Trans People Still Protected — But Under Different Provisions
The Supreme Court clarified that transgender individuals are still protected under the Equality Act 2010, just under different categories, such as gender reassignment and indirect discrimination.
"Transgender people (irrespective of whether they have a Gender Recognition Certificate) are protected by the indirect discrimination provisions of the EA 2010. This applies both in cases of disadvantage shared by those with the characteristic of gender reassignment, and where members of the sex they identify with are disadvantaged — as long as they also share in that disadvantage," the court said.
Trans-individuals can still challenge unfair treatment if they are affected along with their identified gender group or with their biological sex group, even without a GRC.
Background of the Case
The case began in 2018, when a group of campaigners in Scotland challenged how the Equality Act was being interpreted. They argued that legal rights and protections for women — such as access to single-sex spaces — should apply only to those assigned female at birth.
However, the Scottish government took a different stance. It argued that a trans woman with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) is legally recognized as a woman, and should therefore be afforded the same rights and protections as other women under the law.
This disagreement over the definition of “woman” led to the UK Supreme Court’s recent judgment, which settled the matter by stating that for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, “sex” refers to biological sex, not gender identity.
( For more news apart from, 'UK Supreme Court: “Terms 'man,' 'woman,' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological sex” — Landmark Judgment,’ Stay tuned to Rozana Spokesman)
