Transgender rights in the UK in the backdrop of the 2025 Supreme Court judgment

A critical reflection with reference to India

Bibliographic Data

ID21263052
AuthorsDipshreeya Das, Neetu Banduni
Year2025
Volume3
Issue1
Publication date2025-10-05
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueDiscover Global Society (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2731-9687 • E-ISSN: 2731-9687
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s44282-025-00262-w
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited7

Contemporary jurisprudence on gender identity has embraced an inclusive paradigm. Against this backdrop United Kingdom Supreme Court (UKSC) judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v. The Scottish Ministers , confining the definition of “woman” under the Equality Act, 2010 to biological females, notwithstanding the recognition of acquired gender under the Gender Recognition Act, 2004 stand out to be regressive. This ruling, prioritizing statutory coherence over the transgender rights, reinforces biological essentialism in UK. While the progressive constitutional jurisprudence in India since NALSA v. Union of India (2014) and the enactment of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 reflects a transformative ambition, yet remains compromised by paternalistic certification requirements and weak law enforcement. This paper employs a comparative doctrinal and analytical methodology to interrogate how two common-law jurisdictions with different legal trajectory nonetheless confront a shared dilemma, reconciling legal certainty with substantive equality. The study finds that while the UK entrenches narrow statutory definitions, India risks hollowing out its progressive constitutional promise through flawed legislative execution. The paper calls for moving beyond definitional debate towards effective statute upholding the constitutional values of integrity, equality, and dignity for all mankind

Tools

Open DOI