Parents welcome court ruling that use of unisex toilets at Earlston Primary School was unlawful
Yesterday, a judge ruled that state schools in Scotland must provide single-sex toilets for pupils following a legal challenge brought by parents against Scottish Borders Council.
The authority had installed gender neutral toilets at the school.
Parents Leigh Hurley and Sean Stratford, whose child attended the school, complained to the authority about the use of the toilets, the punishment of children who "misgender" others and about an issue relating to trans children participating in sports day.
All three issues were initially rejected, however, the lawyer representing them, Rosie Walker, lodged a petition for review in January.
A court order, known as a declarator, is set to be issued by Judge Lady Ross KC to ensure the legal obligations of Scottish state schools are clear.
Scottish Borders Council accepted the decision.
What is the background to this ruling?
It follows a decision by the Supreme Court on 16 April which ruled that 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act refer to a biological woman and biological sex.
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 (GRC)?
'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."
Leigh Hurley and Sean Stratford were supported in bringing their case in the Court of Session in Edinburgh by For Women Scotland.
'I'm sorry if anyone was made to feel uncomfortable'
Speaking on behalf of Scottish Borders Council, Cllr Julie Pirone apologised to parents.
The family's lawyer believes the case will have 'far-reaching implications'.
Rosie Walker, head of litigation at Gilson Gray solicitors, said: 'All schools in Scotland will now have to look again at whether their toilets comply with the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967, which require half of school toilet facilities to be for boys and half for girls.
'This case, on top of the Supreme Court decision last week, gives focus to the importance of protecting sex based rights and single sex spaces.'
John Lamont, Conservative MP for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk reacts to the court ruling.
The Scottish Government said it would 'carefully consider' the implications of the ruling.
First Minister John Swinney spoke to ITV Border.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Courier
3 hours ago
- The Courier
Prisoners like Angus killer Tasmin Glass could have fewer freedom bids under parole reform proposals
Prisoners like Angus killer Tasmin Glass could be forced to spend longer periods behind bars in between parole hearings. A consultation on parole reforms has been launched by the Scottish Government, considering transparency and communication issues that plague victims in the current process. The consultation comes in the wake of The Courier's A Voice for Victims campaign which has called for these much-needed reforms. We have worked with the family of Glass' victim Steven Donaldson, Linda McDonald who survived an attack by Dundee murderer Robbie McIntosh, and the family of Barry Smullen who was stabbed to death in Perth. Justice Secretary Angela Constance spoke exclusively to The Courier as the parole consultation was launched, saying she believes the process must have victim wellbeing at its heart. The consultation considers 43 questions, which collectively have the potential for important reforms to improve the lives of victims and increase transparency. Potential areas for change include how long a criminal should have to wait between parole hearings after being denied by the board. Currently, for prisoners like Tasmin Glass it is 12 months, and for prisoners like Robbie McIntosh it is two years. Glass is a long-term prisoner while McIntosh is on an order of life restriction. That could be increased depending on the results of the consultation. Victims and their families have long pointed to this aspect of parole as one of the most traumatising, as they feel like they are constantly being forced to engage with the process. Another question raises the possibility of more people attending parole hearings. It asks if victims should have an automatic right to be there, or if media could watch proceedings. Other options include more detail being given by the parole board around its decisions to release or not release. One long-sought reform that is not in the consultation is the current automatic right for long-term prisoners to be considered for parole halfway through their sentence. The Justice Secretary said that question would need to come through a different part of legislation. The Justice Secretary spoke with The Courier in Dundee on Wednesday afternoon, the day of the launch. She applauded The Courier's campaign to help drive these reforms forward. 'I am determined that the parole system, at its very heart, has to have victims and their families and their interests,' said Ms Constance. She added: 'That's crucial to the deliberations that the parole board has to make that's ultimately about public safety as well as rehabilitation. 'The Courier has been a great advocate for victims and their families and has led a campaign that is driven on improvements. 'So while there are some really important fundamental questions about how we improve that overall openness, transparency, information, (and) treatment of victims. 'There are also issues that are important in terms of process and management. 'There's an appetite for us to be looking at all of that. 'This is an attempt by the government to be open and its built on the engagement that we've had with victims, and the advocacy that victims themselves, and papers like The Courier, and victims support organisations have championed.'
Leader Live
4 hours ago
- Leader Live
Judge denies justice department request to unseal Epstein grand jury transcripts
The ruling on Wednesday by Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan came after the judge presiding over the case against British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former girlfriend, also turned down the government's request. Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence after her conviction on sex trafficking charges for helping Epstein sexually abuse girls and young women. Epstein died in jail awaiting trial. A US justice department spokesperson declined to comment. Judge Berman said the information contained in the Epstein grand jury transcripts 'pales in comparison to the Epstein investigative information and materials in the hands of the Department of Justice.' According to his ruling, no victims gave evidence before the Epstein grand jury. The only witness, the judge wrote, was an FBI agent 'who had no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and whose testimony was mostly hearsay'. The agent gave evidence over two days, on June 18 and July 2 2019. The rest of the grand jury presentation consisted of a PowerPoint slideshow shown during the June 18 session and a call log shown during the July 2 session, which ended with grand jurors voting to indict Epstein. Both of those will also remain sealed, Judge Berman ruled. Maxwell's case has been the subject of heightened public focus since an outcry over the justice department's statement last month saying that it would not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The decision infuriated online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and elements of US President Donald Trump's base who had hoped to see proof of a government cover-up. Since then, Trump administration officials have tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case, including by requesting from courts the unsealing of grand jury transcripts. 'The government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein file,' Judge Berman wrote in an apparent reference to the justice department's refusal to release additional records on its own while simultaneously moving to unseal grand jury transcripts. 'By comparison,' he added, 'the instant grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the government's possession. The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct.' Meanwhile, Maxwell was interviewed at a Florida courthouse weeks ago by US deputy attorney general Todd Blanche, and the house oversight committee had also said that it wanted to speak with Maxwell. Her lawyers said they would be open to an interview but only if the panel were to ensure immunity from prosecution. In a letter Maxwell's lawyers, representative James Comer, the committee chairman, wrote that the committee was willing to delay the deposition until after the resolution of Maxwell's appeal to the Supreme Court. That appeal is expected to be resolved in late September. Mr Comer wrote that while Maxwell's testimony was 'vital' to the Republican-led investigation into Epstein, the committee would not provide immunity or any questions in advance of her testimony, as was requested by her team.
South Wales Guardian
4 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Judge denies justice department request to unseal Epstein grand jury transcripts
The ruling on Wednesday by Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan came after the judge presiding over the case against British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former girlfriend, also turned down the government's request. Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence after her conviction on sex trafficking charges for helping Epstein sexually abuse girls and young women. Epstein died in jail awaiting trial. A US justice department spokesperson declined to comment. Judge Berman said the information contained in the Epstein grand jury transcripts 'pales in comparison to the Epstein investigative information and materials in the hands of the Department of Justice.' According to his ruling, no victims gave evidence before the Epstein grand jury. The only witness, the judge wrote, was an FBI agent 'who had no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and whose testimony was mostly hearsay'. The agent gave evidence over two days, on June 18 and July 2 2019. The rest of the grand jury presentation consisted of a PowerPoint slideshow shown during the June 18 session and a call log shown during the July 2 session, which ended with grand jurors voting to indict Epstein. Both of those will also remain sealed, Judge Berman ruled. Maxwell's case has been the subject of heightened public focus since an outcry over the justice department's statement last month saying that it would not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The decision infuriated online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and elements of US President Donald Trump's base who had hoped to see proof of a government cover-up. Since then, Trump administration officials have tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case, including by requesting from courts the unsealing of grand jury transcripts. 'The government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein file,' Judge Berman wrote in an apparent reference to the justice department's refusal to release additional records on its own while simultaneously moving to unseal grand jury transcripts. 'By comparison,' he added, 'the instant grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the government's possession. The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct.' Meanwhile, Maxwell was interviewed at a Florida courthouse weeks ago by US deputy attorney general Todd Blanche, and the house oversight committee had also said that it wanted to speak with Maxwell. Her lawyers said they would be open to an interview but only if the panel were to ensure immunity from prosecution. In a letter Maxwell's lawyers, representative James Comer, the committee chairman, wrote that the committee was willing to delay the deposition until after the resolution of Maxwell's appeal to the Supreme Court. That appeal is expected to be resolved in late September. Mr Comer wrote that while Maxwell's testimony was 'vital' to the Republican-led investigation into Epstein, the committee would not provide immunity or any questions in advance of her testimony, as was requested by her team.
