JK Rowling to fund gender-critical women's cases against employers
The Harry Potter author, who donated to For Women Scotland's gofundme to challenge the definition of gender under the Equality Act in the Supreme Court, has set up a fund to help gender critical women to pursue action against employers and public services.
The J.K. Rowling Women's Fund (JKRWF) says it will provide funding to give women 'the means and confidence to bring to justice cases that make legal precedents, force policy change, and make positive contributions to women's lives in the future'.
READ MORE: Fears 'rigged' Scottish Labour voting system boxes out left-wing MSPs
It sets out a checklist for those applying, such as fighting a tribunal because of 'their expressed beliefs' or being 'forced to comply with unreasonable inclusion policies' in single sex spaces.
The fund's website sets out that it won't hire a lawyer for those hoping to make a legal challenge, so those applying must 'already have sought legal representation, and have a clear desired outcome to your case'.
On social media, Rowling said she would not be accepting public donations to the fund as a 'private fund is the most efficient, streamlined way for me to do this'.
(Image: JKRWF) 'Lots of people are offering to contribute, which I truly appreciate, but there are many other women's rights organisations that could do with the money, so donate away, just not to me!' she added.
Rowling has a net worth of around £945 million and was ranked the eighth wealthiest person in Scotland earlier this month.
It is understood the fund has been operating since the end of 2024.
Rowling celebrated the judgment in the FWS Supreme Court case from her private yacht, and was pictured smoking a cigar. She captioned the photograph: 'I love it when a plan comes together'.
In April, the Supreme Court ruled that under the Equality Act 2010 a woman is defined by 'biological sex' and does not include a transgender woman with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).
This decision went against how the law had been interpreted across public and private bodies in the UK for the past 20 years. Trans women were then banned from playing women's football and cricket.
In the weeks following the judgment, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) released interim guidance that banned transgender people from using the bathroom of their acquired gender. This was described as 'cruel' and 'segregation'.
We told how former first minister Nicola Sturgeon said the Supreme Court ruling had been 'massively misinterpreted'.
It followed similar comments made by Lady Hale, the first female president of the Supreme Court, now retired.
Rowling has been publicly critical of Sturgeon, once being pictured wearing a t-shirt that described the Glasgow MSP as a 'destroyer of women's rights'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
7 hours ago
- Reuters
UK urged to reverse ruling on litigation funding, introduce 'light-touch regulation'
LONDON, June 2 (Reuters) - Britain should urgently reverse a landmark ruling that threw third-party funding of lawsuits into disarray, an influential advisory body recommended on Monday in a report which was welcomed by funders and industry critics alike. The Civil Justice Council (CJC) also called for "light-touch regulation" of the litigation funding sector, which is currently self-regulated, particularly where funding is provided for class action-style lawsuits or to consumers. Monday's report comes after Britain's funding industry was dealt a surprise blow in 2023, when the UK Supreme Court ruled that agreements used to fund many mass lawsuits were unenforceable as they did not comply with rules on so-called damages-based agreements. The CJC said the government should pass legislation to overturn the Supreme Court's decision "as soon as possible", citing the importance of funding for access to justice. Britain's previous government, which asked the CJC to review the sector, said last year it would reverse the Supreme Court decision, before the current government put legislation on hold pending the CJC's report. The Ministry of Justice said in a statement that it welcomed the report and would "outline next steps in due course." The CJC – which advises the government and judiciary on the civil justice system – called for some regulation, including requirements for funders to have adequate capital and provisions to prevent conflicts of interest. It also recommended that class action-style cases need court approval of funding agreements, to allow the court to consider whether the funder's return is fair, just and reasonable. The report rejected, however, the introduction of caps on funders' returns, which the CJC said could not properly take account of the risks of funding cases and was unnecessary for consumer protection if courts had to approve funding deals. Neil Purslow – chair of industry body the International Legal Finance Association, who also founded litigation funder Therium – welcomed the CJC's recommendation to legislate to reverse the Supreme Court ruling. Seema Kennedy, executive director of Fair Civil Justice, which has called for greater regulation of litigation funding, said the CJC's call to regulate the industry was "long overdue". She said: "Proper oversight is essential to protect consumers, ensure transparency, and restore public confidence in a sector that currently operates without sufficient safeguards." Litigation funding is increasingly used in Britain, with the CJC citing figures that funders in England and Wales had assets of 2.2 billion pounds ($3 billion) in 2021. English courts have repeatedly recognised the need for funding to bring mass lawsuits, where the case's total value is often in the billions but payouts to individual consumers can be as low as double figures. The CJC report comes after court approval of a 200 million-pound settlement in a case against Mastercard, despite the opposition of funder Innsworth, which stands to receive around 68 million pounds.
Daily Mail
9 hours ago
- Daily Mail
GRAHAM GRANT: Drained of credibility by a woke crusade, Police Scotland is now disconnected from the lives of those it serves
You might dimly remember that the police are supposed to be impartial, refusing to take sides in political debate. But that is a fast-receding memory in Scotland, where officers were told gender-critical campaigners are on a par with Nazis. As we revealed last week, a dangerously barmy message was circulated within the ranks making the obscene comparison. It came to light just as top brass were preparing to host a summit with diversity groups about the Supreme Court transgender ruling. In the best traditions of the single force, the media were kept out and we've no idea, officially, about what went on behind closed doors. The timing couldn't have been much worse – it's hard to build bridges with people you've just smeared as fascists. Police officers and staff were told that 'gender binary' - the belief there are only two genders - was a 'key feature' of Nazism. The identities of the person who sent the memo, or the officers who okayed it, haven't been disclosed - but it was removed from the force intranet and 'advice will be given around the use of language'. Police Scotland officers were told gender-critical campaigners are on a par with Nazis Well, that's all right then – but doesn't it seem a woefully inadequate response, given the seriousness of the charge the document contained? In any sane universe, whoever gave the green light for this inflammatory and grossly offensive document would be sacked, or at the very least severely disciplined, with questions asked about how they passed vetting procedures. Tory MSP Tess White is pressing the Chief Constable, Jo Farrell, for answers - but so far the force hasn't gone beyond the rather woolly statement about 'advice' on language. There's a deafening silence, as you would expect, from John Swinney and his colleagues - passionate advocates of the radical transgender policies recently found to have been without legal foundation by the highest court in the land. The Supreme Court ruling in April stipulated that 'sex' means biological sex under the Equality Act 2010 - which presents something of a challenge for the public sector, including Police Scotland. Trans ideology is baked into their protocols to comply with SNP government diktats - and now it will have to be rooted out. Much dragging of feet has ensued - though we're promised a new Police Scotland gender strategy soon, which will make everything crystal clear. Presumably, it won't repeat the Nazi slur - but who knows? The police position on these issues is hopelessly muddled. It had to write to the Equality and Human Rights Commission for guidance on whether rapists should be allowed to self-identify as women. And last month Ms Farrell said police wouldn't be rushed into change in the wake of the Supreme Court judgment, while her deputy Alan Speirs said it had had 'no bearing' on how the force does business. The Scottish Police Authority, which is supposed to hold the force to account, seemed largely content with this inertia, with some honourable exceptions on the board. The lack of urgency comes as the United Nations warns against letting criminals choose their own gender, after a new report found that 49 rapists were allowed to identify as female offenders in the UK. Reem Alsalem, the UN's special rapporteur for violence against women and girls, said at least a third of UK forces were still collecting data on criminals and victims' self-identified gender rather than their assigned sex at birth. Police Scotland has been accused of misleading parliament over its own policy on recording gender, after any number of apparent flip-flops. Ms Farrell said last year that a man who commits rape or serious sexual assault will always be recorded as male. But in March it emerged that this stance - which campaigners said was a major policy U-turn - was not communicated to officers. With the number of claims of rape and attempted rape soaring to a record level, it's hard to see how any of this will provide reassurance to victims who might be considering whether to report their ordeal to the police. A woke crusade has drained credibility from a force which seems to be disconnected from the reality of life for those it is supposed to serve. Outside the sanctuary of police bosses' Zoom chats, gangland and youth violence are spiralling out of control. A diminished front line is battling this rising tide while police chiefs, who once kowtowed to a legally baseless equalities agenda, are busy trying to reverse out of the cul-de-sac they built for themselves. On streets where the reek of cannabis fumes is ever-present, young people are being stabbed and addicts are openly injecting drugs, sometimes only yards away from the SNP-backed heroin 'shooting gallery' - which costs us more than £2million a year. Beat bobbies are rarely seen on patrol and police stations are being sold off, reinforcing the impression that the force is in headlong retreat. More than 12,000 supposedly 'minor' crimes have been effectively written off under the 'proportionate response' approach, which is good news for criminals - but just another slap in the face for long-suffering victims. Yet the many mistakes of the SNP as it inflicted swingeing cutbacks on policing have been compounded by the misjudgments of police chiefs who approved this disgraceful abdication of responsibility. Last month a senior officer broke ranks to suggest that police need to stop 'wasting their time' probing social media posts and get back on the streets to deter crime. Rob Hay, president of the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents, deserves praise for pointing out that it is not the job of police to intervene when people were offended by posts. He said unless a crime was suspected, officers should be 'nowhere near' social media and must get back into the community to prevent and fight crime. Mr Hay has previously warned police must be 'pacifists in the culture war' and stay away from the 'divisive, political and toxic nature of some of the debate raging in wider society'. It's the kind of common sense which Police Scotland badly needs - but it shows no sign of heeding Mr Hay's wise counsel. For proof, consider the case of Tory MSP Murdo Fraser, whose mocking tweet about the SNP government's transgender policy was logged as a 'hate incident'. He shared a column which claimed the government's non-binary equality action plan would lead to children being 'damaged by this cult'. The row over Police Scotland's Nazi claim gives us an insight into the mindset of police chiefs - and makes it easier to see why police would regard an MSP's honestly held view as something akin to a thought crime. Once again, the only beneficiaries of this absurd shambles are the real criminals who are running riot - while policing is reduced to a laughing stock.
Daily Mirror
11 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Mark Ruffalo and Brian Cox demand Keir Starmer helps free Brit before mum dies
Actors Brian Cox, Mark Ruffalo and Bill Nighy are among celebrities calling on Keir Starmer to do more to secure Alaa Abd el-Fattah's freedom as his mum fights for her life in hospital Celebrities Brian Cox, Mark Ruffalo and Bill Nighy have pleaded with Keir Starmer to do more to free an imprisoned Brit whose hunger-striking mum is fighting for her life. The trio are among supporters - also including Harry Potter star Emily Watson and actor Joseph Fiennes - who have written to the PM demanding tougher action to secure Alaa Abd el-Fattah's freedom. They warn it is "almost too late" to save his mother, Dr Laila Soueif, who was admitted to St Thomas' Hospital in London last week. Pro-democracy writer Alaa is behind bars in Egypt, despite his heavily-criticised prison sentence expiring in September last year. Dr Soueif, who has not eaten for 246 days, has lost more than seven stone, and has dangerously low blood sugar. Medics warn the 69-year-old is at risk of sudden death as her condition worsens. In their letter, supporters told the PM they are "watching with dismay as Dr. Laila Soueif risks death to save her son". The letter continues: "Alaa should never have been imprisoned in the first place. He is an internationally respected writer and a brave advocate for democracy. He has now lost over ten years of his life to the prison cell. His most recent prison sentence expired on September 29 2024 - yet he is still behind bars." And they conclude: "Prime Minister, we are asking you to take bold, immediate action to save her life and to re-unite Alaa with his family. It is almost too late." Succession star Mr Cox has previously called on the PM to "pick up the phone" to Egyptian Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and negotiate Alaa's release. And Hulk actor Mr Ruffalo is a longstanding supporter of the campaign to free him. Alaa was sentenced to five years in prison in 2019 for "spreading fake news" after criticising the Egyptian government. His family are desperate to get him back to the UK, where he has a 13-year-old son, Khaled, living in Brighton. On Sunday Dr Souif told the PM: 'Mr Starmer, you have told me that you are committed to doing everything to secure Alaa's release, but Alaa is still in prison so obviously what you are doing is not the best that can be done.' She told LBC Radio: 'I said from the beginning, I will continue until either Alaa has been released or my health collapses completely.' She met with Mr Starmer in February, when the PM gave his "personal commitment" to securing Alaa's release. He has spoken to the Egyptian President twice pressing for him to be freed. The UN last week said Aala is being arbitrarily detained - placing an obligation on Egypt to release him immediately under international law. A Foreign Office spokeswoman said: "We are deeply concerned by Laila's hospitalisation. "We remain in regular contact with Laila's family and have checked on her welfare. We are committed to securing Alaa Abd El-Fattah's release. "The Foreign Secretary stressed the urgency of the situation in a call with his counterpart on Sunday morning, and further engagement at the highest levels of the Egyptian government continues.'
