A non-binary US citizen has lost their bid to have their gender legally recognised in the UK, after High Court judges rejected their case.
Ryan Castellucci, a non-binary Californian cybersecurity worker, brought a challenge over the way their change of legal gender had been recognised by British authorities.
Castellucci, who came to the UK in 2019, changed their legal gender and birth certificate to non-binary in the state of California.
However, they were told they would have to choose between specifying as either male or female to gain a UK Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).
Non-binary is an umbrella term for gender identities that are not solely male or female.
It is legally recognised as a gender in some countries but there is no option for the term on a GRC in the UK.
Last November, the High Court in London heard the UK recognises changes of legal gender that have taken place in several foreign countries and states – including California.
Judges were told that, when the American tried to update their UK residence permit to reflect their gender, they were told they could not be recorded as non-binary.
However, in a ruling on Wednesday, Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing and Mrs Justice Heather Williams dismissed Castellucci’s legal challenge against Kemi Badenoch, Minister for Women and Equalities, and the Gender Recognition Panel (GRP).
Act ‘refers to gender as binary concept’
They said: “We have decided that whenever the Gender Recognition Act refers to ‘gender’ it refers to a binary concept – that is, to male or to female gender.
“The GRP accordingly, had and has no power to issue a gender recognition certificate to the claimant which says that they are ‘non-binary’.”
The judgment was handed down remotely on Wednesday.
Castellucci had argued that they were being discriminated against on the grounds of their status as a non-binary person, contrary to Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
However, the judges concluded: “As we explain, the critical question on the Article 14 claim is justification, and we have decided that any difference in treatment is amply justified.
“For reasons which are similar to those which support our construction of the GRA, we have decided that it is not ‘possible’ to read the GRA as the claimant would wish us to.
“Finally, as we have decided that as there is no breach of Article 14, we have no power to make a declaration of incompatibility.”
Solicitors for Castellucci said that they would not be providing a comment in response.
