Louisiana Judge Clears LSU to Bring NFL Players Back to College

LSU coach Lane Kiffin moved a step closer Thursday night to potentially adding former NFL players to his team after a Louisiana judge granted...
HomeNewsTransgender Woman Wins Landmark ‘What Is a Woman’ Court Case

Transgender Woman Wins Landmark ‘What Is a Woman’ Court Case

A closely watched sex discrimination battle over the women-only social media app Giggle for Girls has come to an end, after the High Court sided with transgender woman Roxanne Tickle in the landmark “what is a woman” case.

Giggle for Girls founder Sall Grover had sought to challenge an earlier ruling that she unlawfully discriminated against Ms Tickle, a transgender woman who was born male, by removing her from the female-only networking platform in 2021.

Ms Grover’s appeal was rejected by the Federal Court in May, with the court also increasing the damages payable to Ms Tickle to $20,000.

In addition, the court ordered Ms Grover to cover Ms Tickle’s legal costs, capped at up to $100,000.

“The full court has found that Giggle for Girls and Ms Grover both excluded Ms Tickle from the Giggle app and refused to readmit her on the basis of her gender-related appearance by reference to her selfie,” Federal Court Justice Melissa Perry said at the time.

‘This amounted to direct discrimination by reference to a characteristic that pertains to people of Ms Tickle’s gender identity, being a transgender woman.’

‘[It was] treating Ms Tickle less favourably than a woman designated female at birth.’

Ms Grover challenged the verdict in the High Court of Australia, which on Thursday rejected her bid for special leave to appeal and awarded costs to Ms Tickle.

Giggle for Girls app founder Sall Grover vowed to never stop fighting after High Court of Australia rejected her bid for special leave to appeal

Giggle for Girls app founder Sall Grover vowed to never stop fighting after High Court of Australia rejected her bid for special leave to appeal

The High Court ruled in favour of transgender woman Roxanne Tickle (pictured)

The High Court ruled in favour of transgender woman Roxanne Tickle (pictured)

‘There is no reason to doubt the Full Court’s construction of s. 7D(1) and (2) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth),’ the High Court ruling stated.

‘Any appeal dependent on the demonstration of error in the Full Court’s construction of those provisions has insufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal.’

An ‘absolutely devastated’ Ms Grover vowed never to stop fighting.

‘We now have confirmation that the High Court is captured by an ideology, as is the Federal Court, and so we need politicians to fix this,’ Ms Grover told The Australian.

‘We have a government that won’t, but we have rising opposition to this kind of ideology being imposed upon people.

‘The law is wrong and the Australian courts have humiliated themselves, while the US has fixed this politically and in the courts, and while the UK has fixed this in the courts. Australia, which could have been a world leader in bringing reality back, has doubled down and gone in the complete opposite direction.’

Lawyers for the Giggle for Girls app argued that it was exempt from discrimination law because it sought to achieve substantial equality between men and women.

Its intention was to create a ‘safe space’ for women, Ms Grover’s lawyers said.

Sall Grover's (pictured) appeal was dismissed by the Federal Court in May, where damages to Rozanne Tickle were doubled to $20,000

Sall Grover’s (pictured) appeal was dismissed by the Federal Court in May, where damages to Rozanne Tickle were doubled to $20,000

‘This case is the ‘what is a woman?’ case, and one must be able to speak about it fearlessly and frankly,’ Ms Grover’s legal team said. 

But this was challenged by lawyers for the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, who argued that ‘invidious discrimination’ could be permitted under the guise of a special measure.

Under the Sex Discrimination Act, it is illegal to discriminate against someone because of their gender identity, sexual orientation or intersex status.

Sex Discrimination Commissioner Anna Cody provided information to the court in the case.

‘The Sex Discrimination Act is intended to ensure all people are treated equally and can participate fully in public life. These protections extend to all women, including transgender women,’ Dr Cody said.

Equality Australia hailed Thursday’s decision as a major win.

‘For decades, Australian laws have recognised that a person’s legal sex is not limited to the sex they were assigned at birth. Any other interpretation would deny the reality and existence of trans people,’ Equality Australia legal director Heather Corkhill said.