Did the outdated framework of the Equality Act 2010 force the Supreme Court’s hand in its binary interpretation of ‘sex’? Zoë Chapman unpacks the implications for trans rights following For Women Scotland
- The UK Supreme Court has ruled that ‘woman’ and ‘man’ in the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) refer strictly to biological sex, excluding trans individuals from these categories in legal terms.
- While trans people retain some protections under EqA 2010, the judgment effectively permits blanket exclusions from single-sex spaces, undermining their legal recognition and rights.
- The ruling exposes EqA 2010’s outdated binary framework, prompting calls for inclusive updates that reflect modern understandings of sex and gender.
On 16 April this year, the UK Supreme Court delivered its judgment in the case of For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16. The appeal was concerned with establishing the correct interpretation of the words ‘woman’, ‘man’ and ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). From the outset, the Supreme Court was at pains to stress that the ruling ought not to be considered a ‘triumph’
