Murray Blackburn Mackenzie says some charities risk misinterpreting the scope of the Supreme Court equality ruling
A new report has suggested that some women’s charities have failed to properly engage with a recent Supreme Court ruling on inclusivity, raising concerns about how the legal position is being interpreted across the sector.
Research by Murray Blackburn Mackenzie reviewed 19 UK-based charities to assess how they have responded to the For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers ruling.
The judgment addressed how “sex” is defined in law in the context of the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, providing clarification on the interpretation of sex within the Equality Act framework.
The report argues that, despite this clarification, some charities have not fully engaged with the legal reasoning of the Supreme Court, instead focusing more on broader debates around inclusion and gender identity.
According to the authors, this risks creating confusion about the legal position, particularly where public statements or policies do not accurately reflect the scope and limits of the judgment.
It highlights that the ruling is specific to a defined statutory context and should not be treated as a general statement on all aspects of equality law, requiring careful and accurate interpretation in practice.
The report also points to the implications for service provision and policy development, noting that charities operating in affected areas must ensure their approaches are legally robust as well as consistent with their objectives.
It adds that charities play a significant role in shaping public understanding, and therefore have a responsibility to ensure that their commentary remains aligned with the legal framework established by the courts.
The authors conclude that the issue is not about restricting debate, but about maintaining a clear distinction between legal interpretation and advocacy, particularly where misunderstandings may affect compliance and public confidence.