FOI 26-052 Supreme Court Ruling April 2025

Freedom of Information Request

Reference
FOI 26-052 Supreme Court Ruling April 2025
Request Date
28 Jan 2026
Response Date
25 Feb 2026
Information Requested

Information required:

Supreme Court judgement on the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 As the Board will be aware, Gillian Russell, Director NHS Scotland Health Workforce Directorate, wrote to Board Chief Executives on 30th March 2025 in relation to the Supreme Court judgement of April 2025, setting out what government expected Boards to do. In this regard, Ms Russell set out: Following the Supreme Court Ruling regarding the definition of ‘woman’ in the Equality Act 2010, my colleagues wrote to you on 30 May to bring to your attention to guidance for public bodies https://www.gov.scot/publications/uk-supreme-court-ruling-on-meaning-of-sex-inequality-act-update/.

 

I am now writing to you to reinforce that message, and the importance of Boards ensuring that the law is followed, and the Supreme Court judgement implemented. It is important that Boards, as independent legal entities, seek their own legal advice and are confident that they are complying with the judgement and with all relevant legislation and regulations. In the context provided by Ms Russell’s letter and in terms of the provisions of the Freedom of Information [Scotland] Act 2002,

 

I write to ask that the Board provides me with the following information:

 

  1. Has the Board obtained their own legal advice on complying with the judgement and with all relevant legislation and regulations, all as set out in Ms Russell’s letter of 30th September 2025?

 

  1. If the answer to this is yes, can you please provide me with:
  2. A copy of the legal advice obtained by the Board
  3. The total cost to the Board of obtaining that advice
  4. A copy of any planned actions, including timetables, the Board has drawn up based on the advice received and ensuring that the Board will be compliant, as an employer and as a service provider, with the judgement and with all relevant legislation and regulations
  5. A note of the total costs anticipated to the Board of changes needed to policy and practice to ensure compliance with the judgement and with all relevant legislation and regulations

 

  1. If the answer is no, can you provide me with a copy of the Board meeting minutes at which the Chief Executive reported receipt of Ms Russell’s letter and an explanation as to why the Board has not sought the legal advice recommended by government?

 

  1. In either scenario, has the Board flagged the reputational, financial and other risks associated with non-compliance with the judgement and with all relevant legislation and regulations, in the Board’s Corporate Risk Register?

 

  1. If yes, can you please provide me with a copy of the Corporate Risk Register entry
  2. If no, can you please provide me with a copy of papers, emails and any relevant correspondence associated with a decision not to include the matter in the Board’s Corporate Risk Register.

 

  1. Copies of any progress reports on all of the above made to Ms Russell providing the ‘assurances on your work in this area’ as flagged in her letter of 30th September 2025 regard
Response

For context, prior to the April 2025 Supreme Court judgment, the Scottish Ambulance Service operated in line with existing national equality guidance applicable at the time. Following the judgment, SAS awaited the issuance of updated national guidance, including the forthcoming revised Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) Code of Practice, before determining whether bespoke legal advice or local policy changes were required. - Equality regulator opens consultation on updates to services Code of Practice | EHRC

 

Any issues arising within SAS in relation to the application of the supreme court judgement are managed on a case‑by‑case basis, with input from appropriate Human Resources and Equalities leads, in line with policies and procedures.

 

You asked for information about actions taken by the Scottish Ambulance Service (SAS) following the UK Supreme Court judgment of April 2025 on the meaning of sex in the Equality Act 2010 and the subsequent communications referenced in your request.

 

Q1 – The Scottish Ambulance Service (SAS) has not commissioned bespoke internal or external legal advice specifically in response to the April 2025 Supreme Court judgment or the correspondence referenced in your request.

 

Q2(a)-(d) - As the Scottish Ambulance Service has not obtained bespoke legal advice of the nature described in your request, the information requested at Q2(a)–(d) is not applicable.

 

Q3 – We have reviewed the published Board minutes and papers for the period and did not identify an item recording receipt of the letter referenced in your request.  It is for this reason we have applied section 17 of the Freedom of Information Scotland Act 2002 as information not held. 

I should advise, the Scottish Ambulance Service publishes all Board papers and minutes on their website - Board Papers

Please see the first paragraph for the explanation about not obtaining legal advice.

 

Q4 – The Scottish Ambulance Service does not have a Corporate Risk Register entry identifying the risks of non-compliance with the judgement.

 

Q5 – Not Applicable.  Corporate Risk Register (Public) items are published in the Board packs available on the Scottish Ambulance Service’s website - Microsoft Word - 2026-01-28 Item 07 PART 1 Corporate Risk Register Public

 

Q6 – The Scottish Ambulance Service intends to comply fully with the judgment and relevant legislation. As non‑compliance is not considered a risk, there are no related records.

 

Q7 - We do not hold any recorded progress reports provided to Ms Russell giving “assurances” as described.

In This Section