- Joined
- Nov 12, 2022
Why the long face?
Our best boy Ryan Castellucci lost his appeal so bad he's legal battle got covered by the BBC (archive) - Reminder that he has about 200'000 GDP legal debt for trying to win a case to have a made up gender marker on his UK documents.
In short, he paid around 70'000 GBP to be told by the judge that the case is off-topic. That figure is my estimation, he keeps talking about 150'000 GBP of debt but that figure has not changed in a year now.Ryan Castellucci previously lost a High Court challenge to have their gender recorded as non-binary on a gender recognition certificate - a document which changes someone's legal sex - after moving to the UK in 2019.
They had obtained legal recognition as non-binary in California in 2021, and were issued an American passport in 2022 listing their sex as 'X'.
Dismissing the appeal, Lord Justice Singh said the issue was "potentially controversial" and was "better suited to resolution in Parliament than the courts".
It also appears that we are going to see season 3 of this shit showIn a judgment published on Tuesday, Lord Justice Singh said: "The concept of 'gender' in the Gender Recognition Act (GRA), when referred to in the context of the domestic law route, is confined to two genders."
Anna Dews, associate solicitor at Leigh Day, the firm which represented Castellucci, said they were considering appealing the ruling.
She said: "Ryan's only registered gender is non-binary. Despite Parliament legislating for the UK to recognise foreign-acquired genders, the courts have so far ruled that non-binary foreign genders do not count.
"Ryan considers that there cannot be true gender equality without recognition of the fact that not all genders are binary."
@AssignedEva did a nice summary of the hearings:
Ryan got his judgement.
Claim 1: "The Gender Recognition Act says it will recognise the gender the person changed their gender to in another country. I'm non-binary in California, so that means you have to recognise me as non binary. The UK provides some legal recognition to things that it wouldn't accept domestically, like a husband trying to import one wife (only) where he's got a polygynous marriage, so they clearly meant to allow wiggle room."
Denied. There's nothing to suggest the UK Government went "we'd better make sure we recognise any different gender status that exists in other countries" when they passed this law.
[ snip ]
They are still using that same single photo, probably because he looks like a genderblob today. I am not sure but there are not that many photos of him in public circulation
