Scottish government ordered to pay £400k after losing Supreme Court gender ruling

The Scottish government has paid nearly £400,000 to campaign group For Women Scotland after losing a landmark Supreme Court case concerning the legal definition of a woman under UK equality law.

For Women Scotland confirmed it received £242,500 to cover legal expenses from the Supreme Court challenge, alongside £150,000 relating to earlier proceedings at the Court of Session.

Combined with its own legal costs, Scottish ministers have spent at least £766,498 defending their interpretation of gender protections.

The case focused on whether transgender individuals holding a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) should be treated as women under sex-based protections contained within equality legislation.

The Scottish government argued that individuals with a GRC were entitled to the same legal protections as biological women.

However, in 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that, for the purposes of equality law, the term “woman” refers to biological sex.

Scottish ministers have since said they accept the judgment and are working through the practical implications of the ruling.

The legal dispute began in 2018 following Scottish legislation designed to improve gender balance on public sector boards.

Ministers included transgender individuals within female representation quotas, which prompted For Women Scotland to launch a judicial challenge.

The campaign group argued that including transgender individuals in female quotas weakened protections specifically intended for women based on biological sex.

Initial rulings in Scottish courts supported the government’s interpretation.

In 2022, the Court of Session concluded that the definition of sex under the legislation was not limited to biological sex. For Women Scotland appealed that decision and ultimately secured victory at the Supreme Court.

The dispute unfolded alongside wider debates over gender recognition reform in Scotland. Proposed legislation aimed at simplifying the legal process for changing recognised sex was later blocked by the UK government and has since been paused.

A Scottish government spokesperson said the payment settlement followed standard procedures for determining legal costs after litigation concludes.

Despite accepting the Supreme Court ruling, disagreements remain over how the decision should be applied across public policy.

For Women Scotland is currently pursuing further legal action challenging Scottish government guidance on housing transgender prisoners.

The group argues that existing prison placement policies remain inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s emphasis on biological sex in equality law.

Scottish ministers have defended their approach, stating that applying a blanket rule based solely on birth sex could raise human rights concerns and create safety risks in some cases.

The case has also drawn political criticism. Scottish Conservative MSP Tess White accused ministers of wasting public money by defending policies that were later overturned.

For Women Scotland has said the recovered legal costs will support its ongoing and future cases relating to sex-based rights.

The dispute highlights continuing tensions across the UK over how equality law balances protections based on biological sex with gender identity recognition, with further legal challenges expected.