UK's first trans judge appeals to European court over supreme court ruling
Britain's first transgender judge is taking the UK to the European court of human rights over the supreme court's ruling on biological sex.
The UK supreme court ruled earlier this month that the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act referred only to a biological woman and to biological sex, with subsequent guidance from the equalities watchdog amounting to a blanket ban on trans people using toilets and other services of the gender they identify as.
Victoria McCloud, a retired judge, is applying to the European Court of Human Rights to bring action against the UK for infringement of her article 6 Rights.
Article 6 of the European convention on human rights (ECHR) guarantees the right to a fair trial in both criminal and civil matters.
Last year, McCloud sought leave to join the litigation in the supreme court case brought by the gender critical campaigners For Women Scotland against the Scottish government, arguing it could significantly affect legal protections for transgender women, but was rejected.
McCloud, now a litigation strategist at W-Legal, told the Guardian: 'The basis is that the supreme court refused to hear me, or my evidence, to provide them with information about the impact on those trans people affected by the judgment and failed to give any reasons'.
'Those are two basic premises of normal justice. There were protest groups speaking on behalf of women in this court case, but ordinary women were not actually represented as a whole.
'The disabled were not represented, and now we're seeing the Conservatives saying that trans people have got to use the disabled loos, which impacts the lives of disabled people. The impacts of all of this have not been dealt with.'
The supreme court judgment, and subsequent guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), the watchdog that enforces the Equality Act, has sent shock waves through the UK's transgender community and left many business and services unclear about what facilities they are expected to offer.
In an 'interim update' on how the ruling should be interpreted, the EHRC said on Friday that in workplaces and services open to the public, such as hospitals or cafes, 'trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities and trans men (biological women) should not be permitted to use the men's facilities'.
Sign up to First Edition
Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
Over the weekend, the Cabinet Office minister Pat McFadden said it was 'a logical consequence' that transgender people would be banned from using the toilets of the gender they identify as.
McCloud said that, rather than resulting in clarity, the judgment and subsequent government and commission statement had 'brought chaos'.
'There's chaos because we've got the supreme court saying one thing, and we've got the government and the EHRC saying another, we've got planning rules that the last government set, whereby inclusive bathrooms are supposed to be discouraged.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edinburgh Reporter
an hour ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Winter fuel payment announced in England and Wales means uplift for Scotland
In England and Wales, people who are old enough to receive the State Pension and who have income of less than £35,000 will receive a Winter Fuel Payment this winter. This adds up to 9 million pensioners south of the border – which the UK Government says is around three quarters of all pensioners living there. Winter Fuel payments are no longer paid to Scottish pensioners. In winter 2024/25 pensioners were paid Pension Age Winter Heating Payment through the DWP, but in 2025 The Scottish Government announced that the Pension Age Winter Heating Payment will be paid by Social Security Scotland to all qualifying pensioners. The payment will be either £200 or £300 and £100 to other pensioners. Payment will be made to everyone born before 23 September 1958, who lives in Scotland – and who is in receipt of certain other benefits. The UK Government also confirmed that the change – which is a u-turn on Keir Starmer's previous announcement – will cost around £1.25 billion in England and Wales. It is believed that means-testing of the Winter Fuel Payment will save around £450 million, subject to certification by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) compared to the system of Winter Fuel Payments for everyone regardless of income. In Scotland this payment is devolved and the UK Government said the government will receive a 'mechanical uplift' in their funding as a result of the change in England and Wales. It is thought that might be around £100 million. Social Justice Secretary, Shirley Anne Somerville, said: 'The UK Government's decision to cut the winter fuel payment was a betrayal of millions of pensioners and that is why the Scottish Government took action to introduce a winter heating payment for all pensioners in Scotland. 'I welcome any extension of eligibility by the UK Government, but this is a U-turn the Chancellor should have made a long time ago. But there is still no detail about how the Chancellor intends to go about that. Unfortunately, it still sounds as if many pensioners will miss out. 'We have once again not been consulted on the policy and its implications in Scotland and will scrutinise the proposals carefully when then are announced. I would therefore urge the UK Government to ensure the Scottish Government is fully appraised of the proposed changes as soon as possible. 'The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury last week to urge the UK Government to share its plans with us as quickly as possible, so that we can understand any implications for our own programmes and, crucially, our budget.' Previously the UK Government announced that Winter Fuel Payments would be restricted to pensioners in receipt of Pension Credit. When First Minister, John Swinney, attended the round table meeting in London at the end of May he asked the prime minister to restore winter fuel payments to all pensioners regardless of means. The costs will be accounted for at the Budget and incorporated into the next OBR forecast. The Chancellor said she will take decisions on funding in the round at that forecast to 'ensure the government's non-negotiable fiscal rules are met', and confirmed that this will not lead to permanent additional borrowing. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, said: 'Targeting Winter Fuel Payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the Winter Fuel Payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out. This will mean over three quarters of pensioners receiving the payment in England and Wales later this winter.' HMRC will reclaim the payment from anyone earning more than £35,000 and no-one is required to take any action or register for the payment. Winter Fuel Payments are worth £200 per household, or £300 per household where there is someone over 80. Shared payments are made to pensioners not on an income-related benefit. Scottish Labour Scottish Labour Social Security spokesperson, Paul O'Kane, said: 'This is welcome news that will bring even more money to Scotland – on top of the record funding settlement Labour delivered in the budget. 'The last Tory government left our public finances in chaos but Labour has made good progress cleaning up the mess it inherited. 'The Winer Fuel Payment is a devolved payment in Scotland and Scottish Labour has long been clear that we want to see it reinstated for the majority of pensioners up here – but despite their loud spin, the SNP voted against our attempts to do so. 'The SNP must not go ahead with plans that would rob poorer pensioners in order to fund payments for millionaires. 'The SNP must re-examine their own proposals in light of this game-changing announcement, ensure payments reach those most in need, and give a cast-iron guarantee that no struggling Scottish pensioners will be left out of pocket under their plans.' Scottish Greens Scottish Greens Social Security spokesperson Maggie Chapman MSP said: 'Cutting the Winter Fuel Payment was one of the first acts of this Labour government. Elected on a promise of 'change' they brought in sweeping austerity that harmed older people across the UK at a time when the cost of living remains sky high. 'There is no doubt that the damage has already been done, families will have lost loved ones, and illnesses will have been caused over the winter months because of the brutal decision by Rachel Reeves and the Labour Government. 'Labour's cutting of the Winter Fuel Payment, refusal to end the two-child benefit cap and regressive austerity measures are forcing people into poverty in Scotland and across the UK 'The reinstatement of the Winter Fuel Payment for some is a welcome move, but we must go further, the Labour government must end the two-child benefit cap which hits working class families the hardest, and they must reverse their cruel austerity policies. 'Poverty isn't inevitable. It's a political policy, a policy which Rachel Reeves has forced upon hundreds of thousands of people across the UK. If Keir Starmer has any shame, he would finally call an end to her disastrous time as Chancellor.' Independent Age Chief Executive Joanna Elson, CBE, said:'We are pleased that the UK Government has listened to the voices of older people on a low income and reconsidered what was an incredibly damaging change to the Winter Fuel Payment. By widening the eligibility criteria, more older people in financial hardship will now receive this vital lifeline in time for winter. 'Our helpline receives thousands of calls from older people making drastic cutbacks just to get by and the changes to the Winter Fuel Payment made this worse. For millions living on low incomes, the entitlement supports them to turn their heating on and stock up on food during the colder months. 'While the changes to the Winter Fuel Payment are positive, they are not a silver bullet that will end pensioner poverty. Around 2 million older people still live in poverty, and measures must be taken to ensure the long-term financial security of all people in later life. There needs to be a cross-party consensus on the adequate income needed in later life to avoid financial hardship. Once this is established, every older person should be supported to receive this amount. Nobody should have to live in poverty as they age.' Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: 'Commonsense has finally prevailed as the winter fuel cut is reversed for most pensioners. Whilst this is an important step forward, questions will be asked about how this disastrous decision was made in the first place, the damage may not easily be reversed. 'Leadership is about choices and the choice to pit workers against pensioners was simply wrong. 'Instead of what seems to be a never-ending cycle of cuts, Labour needs to revisit the fiscal rules and bite the bullet on a wealth tax. Britain is the sixth richest economy in the world, the idea that we would be picking the pockets of our pensioners was unnecessary and unforgivable.' When the government announced it was cutting the winter fuel payment, Unite mounted a campaign to get the decision overturned. This included organising a vote at Labour conference opposing the cut in winter fuel payments, and grassroots campaigning which got the cut partially reversed in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Westminster Like this: Like Related
Edinburgh Reporter
an hour ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Call for a special day for Wallace
A new campaign has been launched to create a national day to celebrate Sir William Wallace. An online petition calls for The Scottish Government to officially recognise August 23 each year as 'Wallace Day'. The date marks the anniversary of the freedom fighter's gruesome death in London in 1305. The campaign is being led by the Society of William Wallace, which commemorates 'Scotland's national hero'. It calls for 'a national day of remembrance and celebration in honour of Sir William Wallace, one of Scotland's most iconic figures'. The petition, on the platform, has already attracted hundreds of signatures. It states: 'His courage, sacrifice, and unyielding commitment to Scottish sovereignty have echoed through centuries and remain an enduring symbol of national pride and resilience. 'While monuments, books and films have kept his memory alive, there is no formal day set aside to honour the man who became a cornerstone of Scotland's national identity.' David Reid, convener of the Society of William Wallace, said Wallace Day would not have to be an official bank holiday like St Andrew's Day on November 30, but could be similar to Burns Night, held each year on the poet Robert Burns' birthday, January 25. He added: 'Wallace is pivotal in Scotland's history and many other countries around the world would recognise such a figure. 'We have a national saint and a national bard, who are both celebrated with a special day, but the national hero Wallace is not. I think it sends out the wrong message.' Campaigners say an annual Wallace Day would 'encourage historical education and civic pride, particularly among young Scots'. They say it would also provide 'a focal point for cultural events, heritage tourism, and local community gatherings'. Wallace rose from relative insignificance to become a key figure in Scottish history. He won his most famous victory at the Battle of Stirling Bridge in 1297 and was made Guardian of Scotland the following year. Defeated by an English army led by King Edward I at Falkirk in the summer of 1298, he evaded capture until 1305 when he was betrayed and dragged to London to be tried for treason in Westminster Hall. Wallace was hanged, drawn and quartered at Smithfield in London on 23 August 1305, in an event believed to have formed the opening spectacle of Bartholomew Fair, the largest medieval market in England. His head was put on a spike on London Bridge and his body sent in pieces to Newcastle, Edinburgh, Stirling and Perth as a warning to others. The National Wallace Monument near Stirling, which first opened to the public in 1869, pays tribute to the freedom fighter and is now one of Scotland's most popular landmarks. Awareness of Scotland's national hero was boosted by Mel Gibson's Oscar-winning 1995 epic Braveheart, which introduced the legendary figure to a global audience of millions. Wallace Monument Photo by Clément Proust on Like this: Like Related
North Wales Chronicle
2 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
School loses Supreme Court bid over Christian staff member sacked for LGBT posts
Kristie Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was sacked from her role at Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, in 2019 for sharing Facebook posts criticising teaching about LGBT+ relationships in schools. In February, she won a Court of Appeal battle related to her dismissal, with three senior judges finding that the decision to sack her for gross misconduct was 'unlawfully discriminatory' and 'unquestionably a disproportionate response'. The school sought to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court in March, but three justices refused to give the school the green light to challenge the decision in the UK's highest court. In a decision on Thursday, which was published on Monday, Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen, and Lady Simler said that the school had asked for the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling on four grounds. But they said that the Supreme Court 'does not have jurisdiction' to hear three of the grounds, and the fourth 'does not raise an arguable question of law'. In response to the decision, Mrs Higgs said: 'I am relieved and grateful to the Supreme Court for this common-sense decision. 'Christians have the right to express their beliefs on social media and at other non-work-related settings without fear of being punished by their employer.' Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre – which supported Mrs Higgs' case, said: 'We welcome the Supreme Court's decision, which brings a decisive closure to this extraordinary case.' She continued: 'The Court of Appeal confirmed, loud and clear, that ideological censorship in the workplace, particularly against sincerely held Christian convictions, is illegal. 'This latest decision from the Supreme Court is further proof that our tireless work at the Christian Legal Centre, in defending so many Christian freedoms cases, has not been in vain.' Mrs Higgs, who worked as a pastoral administrator and work experience manager at the school, shared two posts on a private page under her maiden name in October 2018 to about 100 friends, which raised concerns about relationship education at her son's Church of England primary school. She either copied and pasted from another source or reposted the content, adding her own reference in one post to 'brainwashing our children'. BREAKING: The Supreme Court has today refused to hear the appeal of Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire of the landmark Kristie Higgs Court of Appeal ruling. In February 2025, in a seminal judgment for Christian freedom and free speech, the Court of Appeal had reversed… — Christian Concern (@CConcern) June 9, 2025 Pupils were to learn about the No Outsiders In Our School programme, a series of books that teach the Equality Act in primary schools. An employment tribunal found in 2020 that while Mrs Higgs' religion was a protected characteristic, her dismissal was lawful, but this decision was overturned by an Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in 2023. But the EAT ruled the case should be sent back to an employment tribunal for a fresh decision, which Mrs Higgs' lawyers challenged in the Court of Appeal as 'unnecessary'. In a judgment, Lord Justice Underhill, sitting with Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, ruled in Mrs Higgs' favour in February, stating: 'The dismissal of an employee merely because they have expressed a religious or other protected belief to which the employer, or a third party with whom it wishes to protect its reputation, objects will constitute unlawful direct discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act.'
