What will this achieve if 'won' - and why are the Good Law Project prepared to assert as truth matters which are highly controversial and unsupported by evidence?
Thank you for a very clear and detailed exposition of the grounds for this GLP case, why they are so flawed and why it is very unlikely to achieve anything useful: basically a waste of money (and time). Having cancelled my own monthly sub to GLP a couple of months ago over its attitude to trans issues, I'm glad it's no longer my money being wasted.
Thank you for this, clear and cogent as always. Do you happen to know whether the GLP might be ordered to pay the NHS's costs, or whether they must be met by the taxpayer?
If the court doesn’t agree the NHS acted unlawfully then the claimants have lost and usually have to pay costs but I am guessing the child claimants may have a costs capping order.
Thank you for a very clear and detailed exposition of the grounds for this GLP case, why they are so flawed and why it is very unlikely to achieve anything useful: basically a waste of money (and time). Having cancelled my own monthly sub to GLP a couple of months ago over its attitude to trans issues, I'm glad it's no longer my money being wasted.
I am glad you found it useful.
Thank you, Sarah, for this brilliant analysis and for giving me hope that sense will prevail.
You were awesome on Nick Ferrari. Thinking major major wow, who is this well informed woman? It could only be you. Thank you Sarah
Thank you!
Thank you for this, clear and cogent as always. Do you happen to know whether the GLP might be ordered to pay the NHS's costs, or whether they must be met by the taxpayer?
If the court doesn’t agree the NHS acted unlawfully then the claimants have lost and usually have to pay costs but I am guessing the child claimants may have a costs capping order.
Thank you Sarah for another really helpful article