UK Supreme Court rules 'woman' means biological female

Key Points

The UK Supreme Court has ruled that the legal definition of a woman refers to biological sex
It comes after women’s rights campaigners challenged the Scottish Government’s interpretation of anti-discrimination legislation which applies to England, Scotland and Wales
The ruling is set to impact how trans people are treated as well as who can use women-only spaces

The UK Supreme Court has ruled that the legal definition of a woman refers to “biological women and sex”.

It follows a legal challenge by women’s rights campaigners who challenged the Scottish Government’s interpretation of anti-discrimination legislation which applies to England, Scotland and Wales.

The unanimous decision determined that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the 2010 Equality Act refer to biological women and sex.

“The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex”
Lord Hodge, UK Supreme Court

This means it does not extend to a trans woman with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) – which Supreme Court judge Lord Reed referred to as granting “certificated sex”.

Lord Reed called on all parties to respect the “dignity” of the court.

He said: “Some people will be pleased and others will be disappointed.

“Whatever your feeling may be, please respect the dignity of these courts and remain silent until the court is adjourned.”

The 2004 Gender Recognition Act states that obtaining a GRC changes a person’s sex for all purposes. However, the 2010 Equality Act says that trans people can be excluded from women-only spaces in certain circumstances.

The judges’ decision is set to have major consequences for trans people and for who can access women-only spaces such as female-only hospitals wards, prisons and refuges.

Campaign group For Women Scotland challenged the definition of a woman in Scottish legislation, which mandates 50% female representation on public boards.

For Women Scotland argued the word woman should only apply to people who are female from birth.

The Scottish Government argued that trans people with a GRC should also be included in the definition.

The UK Supreme Court’s ruling was announced shortly before 10am on Wednesday.

Delivering the judgement, judge Lord Hodge said the “central question” is how the words “woman” and “sex” are defined in the 2010 Equality Act.

He said: “Do these terms refer to biological woman or biological sex, or is a woman to be interpreted as extending to a trans woman with a Gender Recognition Certificate?

“The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex”.

He explained that the court found “incoherence” and “impracticalities” in the Scottish Government’s interpretation of the Equalities Act. He said Holyrood’s guidance was “incorrect” and the challenge to that guidance succeeded.

“On one hand, women who make up one half of our population have campaigned for over 150 years to have equality with men – that work still continues. On the other hand, we have a vulnerable and often harassed community struggling against discrimination and prejudice as they seek to live their lives with dignity,” Lord Hodge said.

The full written judgement can be read here.

‘Victory for biology, for common sense’

Kate Barker, chief executive of the LGB Alliance charity, said the Supreme Court ruling “delivers huge benefits to women and to lesbians”.

She said: “This is a victory for biology, for common sense, for reality.

“It’s definitely a victory for lesbians as well, and it was specifically mentioned in the case how lesbians have been disadvantaged by this idea that maybe a man could be a woman and could be a lesbian if he had a certificate, and the ruling just absolutely blew that out of the water.

“It was really fair, it was really clear and it delivers huge benefits to women and to lesbians in particular, so I’m absolutely we’re all thrilled about it.”

Ms Barker said the ruling would cut out a lot of expensive and time-consuming court cases in the future “because it sets a clear precedent”.

The equalities watchdog for Great Britain welcomed the ruling as having addressed challenges around single-sex spaces.

Baroness Kishwer Falkner, chairwoman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said: “We are pleased that this judgment addresses several of the difficulties we highlighted in our submission to the court, including the challenges faced by those seeking to maintain single-sex spaces and the rights of same-sex attracted persons to form associations.”

How did we get here?

The challenge began with the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, which intended to increase the proportion of women on public boards in Scotland.

In 2022, For Women Scotland successfully challenged the original act over its inclusion of trans women in its definition of women.

The Court of Session in Edinburgh ruled that changing the definition of a woman in the act was unlawful as it dealt with matters falling outside the Scottish Parliament’s legal competence.

Following the challenge, the Scottish Government dropped the definition from the act and issued revised advice for public bodies on how to comply with the law.

Supporters of the Sex Matters and the For Women Scotland hold a banner and placards outside the Supreme Court. Getty Images

The new guidance stated that under the 2018 Act the definition of a woman was the same as that set out in the Equality Act 2010 and that a person with a GRC recognising their gender as female had the sex of a woman.

For Women Scotland challenged this revised guidance on the grounds that sex under the Equality Act referred to its biological meaning and said the Government was overstepping its powers by effectively redefining the meaning of “woman”.

That challenge was rejected by the Court of Session’s Outer House on December 13, 2022. For Women Scotland appealed the decision and the Inner House upheld the rejection on November 1, 2023.

For Women Scotland then once again appealed the ruling, taking it all the way to the UK Supreme Court in London.

The ruling is set to impact how trans people are treated as well as who can use women-only spaces iStock

When the group’s legal argument was published ahead of the appeal in November, For Women Scotland director Trina Budge said the ramifications of the case were “far-reaching” and she believes “all sex-based rights protected by the Equality Act are at risk”.

“Not tying the definition of sex to its ordinary meaning means that public boards could conceivably comprise of 50% men, and 50% men with certificates, yet still lawfully meet the targets for female representation,” Ms Budge previously said.

“The stakes are high and the court’s decision will have consequences for everyday single-sex services such as toilets and hospital wards.”

She said the case will determine whether a pregnant woman with a GRC is entitled to maternity leave, what it means to be same-sex attracted, and whether someone with a GRC is entitled to join same-sex groups.

“Trans rights are protected under the separate category of gender reassignment but to fully guarantee women’s rights it is increasingly clear that a consistent, biological and factual understanding of sex is the only workable solution,” Ms Budge previously said.