header-logo header-logo

02 May 2025 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 8114 / Categories: Features , Equality , Discrimination , Diversity
printer mail-detail

Equality Act 2010—‘man’, ‘woman’ & ‘sex’ defined

217270
Nicholas Dobson examines the reasoning behind the Supreme Court’s recent decision on sex & gender
  • Looks at the Supreme Court’s judgment in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers.
  • The terms ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological sex.

On 16 April 2025, the Supreme Court conducted a major exercise in statutory interpretation. For its judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16 focused on establishing the correct meaning of ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). And the court’s unanimous decision was that these terms refer to biological sex. Lord Hodge, Lady Rose and Lady Simler gave a joint judgment, with which the other justices agreed.

As the court explained in opening its long judgment, EqA 2010 ‘seeks to give statutory protection to people who are at risk of suffering from unlawful discrimination’. For while woman have historically suffered discrimination and, since the Sex Discrimination Act

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll