The gender recognition provision – s7 section of the EA (SC Jt para 198), the treatment of sexual orientation (SC Jt 204) and Sport (SC Jt 232) will follow in coming weeks.

That context appears nowhere in the judgment and appears not to have been thought of by their Lordships. The ‘portmanteau’ meaning just does nt work for a number of sections, as I will explore in coming weeks.

What the Supreme Court have clearly failed to grasp is that the purpose of the Gender Reassignment Regulations 1999, Goodwin v UK in 2002, the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and the Equality Act 2010 provisions was to integrate trans people in society, with a small number of exceptions where necessary.

‘Whether Parliament intended a word to have a different meaning in different sections of an Act must be determined by looking at the context of the section in question and the Act as a whole.’

I quite agree.

Thank you.

Of course, a government with courage and integrity would use its majority to pass short legislation to correct the mess made by the Supreme Court.

But I’m not holding my breath …

Do read the passages. It really is that simple, which is why I have great confidence this awful judgment will be overturned when a fresh case makes it back to the Supreme Court or the existing mess gets to the ECtHR in Strasbourg.

The first was referenced in Amnesty’s submissions to the Supreme Court but their Lordships’ judgment doesnt offer trans people the courtesy of explaining why they don’t have the rights Parliament clearly intended to grant them.

… Lord Filkin when taking the GRA through Parliament in 2003 (speaking about the effect on the SDA, the EA, predecessor) and Vera Baird when similarly handling the passage of the EA in 2009. I post both below.

But the strongest, in my opinion, remains the complete failure by the Court, when allegedly divining the ‘will of Parliament’ as to the meaning of ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 to engage with the clear statements by …

I have, in person, watched her give evidence to HoC Committees three times. And I would agree.

I think she has lost her grip on reality outside the walls of her office, and can see her plan slipping away.

None of those are the leaders of her political party.

Thank you. I look forward to a fascinating read.

I would like full copies of this file.