The legal dispute between the Scottish government and the campaign group For Women Scotland remains unresolved, with a significant bill for legal costs still outstanding months after a definitive court ruling.
Court Battle and Unpaid Costs
In April, Scotland's highest court delivered a landmark judgment, ruling that the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex. This ruling was a victory for For Women Scotland (FWS) in their long-running legal challenge.
As a result of losing the case, the Scottish government was ordered to pay a portion of the campaign group's legal expenses. However, payment has not been forthcoming. FWS has revealed that the bill for the Supreme Court element of the case alone exceeds £270,000, while costs associated with earlier hearings at the Court of Session in Edinburgh are said to be more than £150,000.
Trina Budge, a co-director of FWS, stated that the Scottish ministers have yet to enter into any negotiations regarding the settlement. A hearing has been scheduled for January before the Auditor of the Court of Session to formally confirm the final amount the government must pay.
Allegations of Delaying Tactics
Ms Budge expressed her frustration, suggesting the delay is a deliberate strategy. "The delay always suits the paying party but I think it's quite unusual to decline to enter into any discussions at all," she commented.
She further alleged that this could be a "deliberate tactic in the hope of starving us of funds" to hinder the group's ability to pursue a separate, ongoing legal case. This new action challenges the lawfulness of housing male prisoners who identify as transgender in the female prison estate.
Despite these financial pressures, Ms Budge affirmed the group's resolve, noting they have "massive support" and will continue their work regardless.
Government Spending and Response
Figures obtained through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request show that the Scottish government has already spent at least £374,000 on defending the case. The final total cost to the taxpayer, including the payment to FWS, is yet to be confirmed.
When questioned, a Scottish government spokesperson stated, "There is an established process to be undertaken to agree the final costs for a legal case and these will be calculated and published in due course." The government has consistently maintained that it is inappropriate to comment on live litigation.
Ongoing Legal Proceedings and Political Fallout
The ramifications of the Supreme Court judgment continue to unfold. In August, FWS lodged fresh legal action at the Court of Session. This new case claims that the Scottish government's guidance on transgender pupils and the Scottish Prison Service's (SPS) policy on transgender prisoners are in "clear breach of the law" and inconsistent with April's ruling.
In response to the judgment, the Scottish government did issue updated guidance for schools in September, stating that schools must provide separate toilets for boys and girls on the basis of biological sex. However, court proceedings regarding the placement of transgender prisoners continue.
The political debate remains heated. Scottish Tory MSP Tess White criticised the government, urging the administration to "pay up and finally respect the clear judgment from the Supreme Court." She also referenced the Isla Bryson case, a transgender double rapist who was initially sent to a women's prison, as a source of ongoing public concern.
With a hearing on costs set for January and further litigation underway, this contentious issue remains a significant political and legal battleground in Scotland.
