The Scottish Parliament could be landed with a £1million legal bill by the UK Government over the entire costs of the Gender Recognition Reform Bill court battle.
The Sunday Mail understands that Secretary of State for Scotland Alister Jack is considering pursuing all of Westminster’s costs should the challenge fail – leaving taxpayers north of the border paying all the legal fees.
First Minister Humza Yousaf has asked judges to review Jack’s use of a Section 35 order to block the introduction of controversial reforms earlier this month to make it easier to legally change gender.
The UK Government said it will “robustly” defend its decision to veto the bill, adding: “The use of the power is entirely within the devolution settlement as set out from its inception, with cross-party support.”
A judicial review is to be held at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. If the Scottish Government is not successful, it could appeal to have the case heard at the Supreme Court in London.
Legal sources have estimated the bill to the Scottish Government alone could be in excess of £350,000. In a previous Supreme Court battle over the right to hold an independence referendum, the UK Government did not pursue costs despite winning.
A source said: “This is a different set of circumstances as we are talking about a judicial review. There is a feeling that, ‘Why should the UK Government keep having to pay to go to court?’
“It is being discussed whether, if the Scottish Government again fails and it is clear the UK Government has been applying the law correctly all along, Scottish Government ministers should pay the cost of bringing the case.”
The Scottish Government was forced to pay Alex Salmond’s legal costs of over £500,000 in 2019 when it lost a judicial review over its handling of harassment claims involving the former FM. Critics have called on the SNP to abandon what will be a costly legal battle.
Scottish Conservative equalities spokesperson Rachael Hamilton said: “Scots will be furious that the SNP are again willing to splurge potentially millions of pounds of public money on an unwanted, self-serving court case.
"The majority of Scots are opposed to Nicola Sturgeon’s reckless GRR Bill and Humza Yousaf’s legal challenge to the UK Government. They recognise this court case is about fuelling grievance with the UK Government in a bid to divert attention from the chaos engulfing the SNP.”
The gender bill was passed in Holyrood in December but the UK Government used its powers to stop it from becoming law, stating it interfered with UK equality law. Last week the mum of trans-gender double rapist Isla Bryson hit out, accusing the FM of being on an ego trip over gender reform.
Janet Bryson, 63, from Hamilton, said she thinks the Scottish Government will lose its GRR bid and called it a “waste of money.” LGBT rights charity Stonewall said: “Improving legal recognition for trans people in Scotland is an important step to greater equality for trans people by making gender recognition a much less stressful and invasive process.”
A UK Government spokesperson said:“The UK Government will robustly defend the decision to prevent the Scottish Government’s Gender Recognition Reform Bill from becoming law. The Scottish Secretary made the order under Section 35 of the Scotland Act 1998 after thorough and careful consideration of all the relevant advice and the policy implications.
“He was very clear in the accompanying Statement of Reasons how the Bill would have an adverse effect on reserved matters, including on the operation of the law as it applies to Great Britain-wide equalities protections. The use of the power is entirely within the devolution settlement as set out from its inception, with cross party support.”
The SNP said:“The GRR Bill was passed by a majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Tories’ use of Section 35 is an unprecedented challenge to the Parliament’s ability to legislate on clearly devolved matters and it risks setting a dangerous constitutional precedent.”
To sign up to the Daily Record Politics newsletter, click here.
