On April 16, 2025, the UK Supreme Court ruled that the term “woman” in the Equality Act 2010 refers strictly to individuals who are biologically female. The unanimous decision is expected to influence future interpretations of sex-based protections in UK law.
The case was brought by the campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS), which challenged the Scottish government’s policy of including transgender women with Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs) in female representation quotas on public boards. FWS argued that this inclusion extended beyond the meaning of “woman” under the Equality Act.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court clarified that the legal definition of “woman” and “sex” in this context is based on biological sex. Deputy President of the court, Lord Hodge, stated that the decision aims to provide clarity under the law and is not meant to undermine protections for transgender individuals. He added that transgender people are still safeguarded under the Equality Act’s provisions relating to gender reassignment.
The ruling drew mixed reactions. Supporters of FWS and sex-based rights groups praised the decision as a reaffirmation of women’s legal protections. Public figures such as J.K. Rowling voiced support. However, many transgender rights advocates expressed concern that the ruling could restrict transgender women’s access to single-sex spaces and public roles, even for those holding GRCs.
The Scottish government, which had previously revised its guidance to include transgender women with GRCs in gender balance policies, may now be required to adjust those policies to comply with the ruling.
This landmark case has sparked wider debate across the UK on how the law defines sex and gender identity. It highlights the ongoing tension between protecting sex-based rights and ensuring full inclusion and equality for transgender people.
