UK Government to seek reimbursement of gender court case costs
The Court of Session ruled last year the Scottish Secretary acted lawfully when he blocked Holyrood legislation.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The UK Government will seek costs from the Scottish Government incurred as a result of the gender court case.
Scottish Secretary Alister Jack announced on Wednesday he has intimated to Scottish ministers that his Government will seek to be reimbursed.
He had previously told the Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster he was considering such a move.
The case stemmed from Mr Jack’s blocking of the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which he said would impact on UK-wide equalities legislation.
The Scottish Government chose to pursue this litigation in spite of the cost to the taxpayer
His use of Section 35 of the Scotland Act – the first in the history of devolution – was challenged by the Scottish Government at the Court of Session, but it ruled it was lawful.
Scottish ministers opted not to pursue the challenge further last month and a spokesman for the Scottish Government said the costs were incurred in “protecting the powers of the Scottish Parliament”.
Mr Jack said: “The Scottish Government chose to pursue this litigation in spite of the cost to the taxpayer.
“My legal advisers have today intimated to the Scottish Government that we have started the process of seeking an award of expenses in defending the case.”
It is understood a motion will be lodged by the UK Government on Friday, with ministers given until Monday to oppose it.
Appearing before the Westminster committee in December, the Scottish Secretary said costs had hit £150,000, although it will be for the court to decide on a figure if it rules the UK Government should be reimbursed.
A spokesman for the Scottish Government said: “Devolution is fundamentally flawed if the UK Government is able to override the democratic wishes of the Scottish Parliament.
“The costs incurred in this legal challenge relate to protecting the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
“We are aware the UK Government intends to lodge a motion for expenses, and we will consider its terms.”
The Bill would have made it easier for a transgender person to obtain a gender recognition certificate by removing the need for a medical diagnosis, as well as reducing the minimum age and the time required for someone to live in their acquired gender.
But opponents of the legislation said it could impact on protections for women and girls.
Despite the protestations, which saw unrest in the Holyrood chamber over the marathon two-day sitting in the Bill’s final stage, the legislation was passed by MSPs of all parties.
In January of last year, Mr Jack invoked Section 35 for the first time, and then first minister Nicola Sturgeon pledged to fight it in the courts.
In December, Lady Haldane rejected Scottish Government arguments that the order had been issued as a result of a “policy disagreement”.
The Scottish Government has been contacted for comment.