A gender-critical charity has won a Court of Appeal bid to continue fighting rules allowing trans women to use single-sex facilities at Hampstead Heath’s swimming ponds.
Sex Matters previously had their challenge rejected by Mrs Justice Lieven in January, following a years-long campaign to bar trans women from using female facilities at the ponds.
They submitted their legal challenge following the Supreme Court ruling last year that a person’s sex is legally defined by what they were assigned at birth.
Maya Forstater, Sex Matters CEO, said the Court of Appeal’s ruling “confirmed that as a specialist charity with objections focused on the sound administration of the law in relation to sex, Sex Matters has standing to take this case.”
High Court of Justice (Image: Bjorn Erik Pedersen)
Rebuffing Mrs Justice Lieven’s initial decision, appeal judge Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing said the legal challenge could return to the High Court.
She said:
“The judge did not engage with the merits of the grounds for judicial review except at the end of her judgment.”
Public opinion
The City of London Corporation has managed Hampstead Heath since 1989. Back in January, the Corporation published the results of a public consultation on the ponds, the same day as the High Court’s initial ruling.
Hampstead Heath Mixed Swimming Ponds (Image: Tom Page)
Pool users considered six options for the Kenwood Ladies, Highgate Men’s and Hampstead mixed ponds, with 86% voicing their support for trans-inclusive measures.
A spokesperson for the City of London Corporation said: “We note the decision and will continue to contest this case vigorously.”
“These continuing legal challenges require significant time and resources, diverting funds away from managing Hampstead Heath as a registered charity and providing high-quality services for the public.”
The date of a new hearing is yet to be determined by the High Court in London.
Submitted Article
Headline
Short Headline
Standfirst
Published Article
HeadlineLegal challenge to Hampstead ponds trans rules to go ahead
Short HeadlineDebate over Hampstead ponds trans rules continues
StandfirstA legal challenge to new trans-inclusive rules has been given the green light by the Court of Appeal.
A gender-critical charity has won a Court of Appeal bid to continue fighting rules allowing trans women to use single-sex facilities at Hampstead Heath’s swimming ponds.
Sex Matters previously had their challenge rejected by Mrs Justice Lieven in January, following a years-long campaign to bar trans women from using female facilities at the ponds.
They submitted their legal challenge following the Supreme Court ruling last year that a person’s sex is legally defined by what they were assigned at birth.
Maya Forstater, Sex Matters CEO, said the Court of Appeal’s ruling “confirmed that as a specialist charity with objections focused on the sound administration of the law in relation to sex, Sex Matters has standing to take this case.”
High Court of Justice (Image: Bjorn Erik Pedersen)
Rebuffing Mrs Justice Lieven’s initial decision, appeal judge Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing said the legal challenge could return to the High Court.
She said:
“The judge did not engage with the merits of the grounds for judicial review except at the end of her judgment.”
Public opinion
The City of London Corporation has managed Hampstead Heath since 1989. Back in January, the Corporation published the results of a public consultation on the ponds, the same day as the High Court’s initial ruling.
Hampstead Heath Mixed Swimming Ponds (Image: Tom Page)
Pool users considered six options for the Kenwood Ladies, Highgate Men’s and Hampstead mixed ponds, with 86% voicing their support for trans-inclusive measures.
A spokesperson for the City of London Corporation said: “We note the decision and will continue to contest this case vigorously.”
“These continuing legal challenges require significant time and resources, diverting funds away from managing Hampstead Heath as a registered charity and providing high-quality services for the public.”
The date of a new hearing is yet to be determined by the High Court in London.
