header-logo header-logo

Gender critical cases: making bad law?

169190
The law is tying itself in knots over gender critical cases. A new approach is needed urgently to make the UK safer for trans people, says Oscar Davies
  • In recent gender critical cases, judges have taken the wrong approach, permitting the erosion of trans and non-binary people’s rights.
  • Judges must focus on what the belief is, and whether it contains elements of transphobia.
  • If a belief is protected, the manifestations must comply with the Equality Act 2010, or the employer is likely to be justified in sanctioning the employee. Sex has its place, but gender identity—and trans identity—must be respected.

‘Gender critical’ cases are a hot seat of litigation in the UK. But are judges getting it right in their approach?

A ‘belief’ can be protected in certain circumstances under s 10 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). Section 10 states: ‘Belief means any religious or philosophical belief and a reference to belief includes a reference to a lack of belief.’

For a philosophical

To access this full article please fill the form below.
All fields are mandatory unless marked as 'Optional'.
If you already a subscriber to New Law Journal, please login here

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll