London: The UK’s highest court has ruled that the legal definition of a woman under anti-discrimination law refers strictly to someone who is biologically female, in a decision hailed by gender-critical campaigners but condemned by trans rights advocates as a serious setback for equality.
In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court determined that the terms “woman” and “sex” in UK law must be interpreted as referring to biological sex. This means that a transgender woman, even if she holds a gender recognition certificate (GRC), is not legally considered a woman under the law.
Women’s rights groups and prominent campaigners, including author J.K Rowling, responded to the decision with jubilation.
The Harry Potter author said on social media platform X: “It took three extraordinary, tenacious Scottish women with an army behind them to get this case heard by the Supreme Court and, in winning, they’ve protected the rights of women and girls across the UK… I’m so proud to know you”.
But Amnesty International UK described the ruling as “disappointing” with “potentially concerning consequences for trans people”.
The UK government welcomed the judgment, describing it as a move that brings “clarity and confidence for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs”, and that it reaffirmed that “single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government”.
Employment law experts say the ruling will have major practical consequences, warning that employers may need to review HR policies, particularly those relating to access to single-sex facilities.
World Athletics president Lord Sebastian Coe described the decision as “common sense” and said it would help “support women, in places for them that really matter.” The sport’s governing body already bars transgender women who have undergone male puberty from competing in female categories.
Source: 12ft
