The SC judgment specified that the EA protection for gender reassignment remains, but the GRC is overruled where the EA takes effect on matters relating to sex. You know that, because you read the judgment, surely, and know S9.1.c of the GRA means other legislation overrules it.

Show Post

That doesn't change the meaning of homosexual, which is "same-sex attraction". The SC judgment specifically referred to that question. Depends on the size of the club, too.

Show Post

As you like. I don't know the answer re Goodwin - where would it matter, given SSM is legal? The only time sex matters is in relation to EA-affected single-sex spaces occupied by multiple persons, eg sports, prisons, etc.

Show Post

Sex can be legally reassigned for multiple purposes through a GRC. Where a single-sex space exists for the purposes of the EA (sanitary facilities etc), biological not legal sex applies. Your question about the Goodwin case is irrelevant now because GRCs exist and same-sex marriage is legal.

Show Post

It is binding, but the failings it highlighted were addressed by the GRA - written specifically to comply with the ECtHR ruling. The SC's reading of sex doesn't contradict anything. If you read the judgment, they note how their reading is the only way *not* to have contradiction in law.

Show Post