Fighting for legal and social recognition outside the gendered societal structure
LANDMARK APPEAL HEARING
CHRISTIE ELAN-CANE - v - THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Intervener: HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
The hearing took place over two full days on Tuesday 3rd – Wednesday 4th December 2019 at the Court of Appeal, Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London before Lady Justice King, Lord Justice Irwin and Lord Justice Henderson.
I am represented, on a pro-bono basis, by Narind Singh, Eraldo D'Atri, Anne Collins and Jemima Roe of Clifford Chance LLP and Kate Gallafent QC, Tom Mountford and Gayatri Sarathy of Blackstone Chambers.
The first day sets out the Appellant’s grounds for appeal. The Court listened intently as Kate Gallafent QC put forward a compelling argument and cited numerous examples of international case law in a thoroughly researched presentation through the morning session.
The afternoon session began with Kate Gallafent concluding the presentation and then the Court heard from Monica Carss-Frisk QC of Blackstone Chambers, legal counsel representing Human Rights Watch [HRW] who provided further information based on evidence supplied by HRW as international observers in the field.
The morning of the second day was taken up by the Respondent’s legal representative arguing that fundamental human rights do not apply in this case. The presentation was unconvincing and was at times extremely offensive to anyone affected by the issue and unable to obtain accurate, affirming identity documentation.
The afternoon session started with the Respondent’s counter appeal that related to costs. Tom Mountford responded to the counter appeal on my behalf.
The session – and the appeal – concluded with Kate Gallafent QC rebutting the nefarious arguments put forward by the Respondent earlier in the day.
Read HERE for background information on the case.
The Court of Appeal selected the hearing for livestreaming in recognition of the significance of this issue to the public. Livestream recordings can be watched HERE.
The case for ‘X’ PASSPORTS versus the UK Government’s discriminatory passport policy caught the attention of news outlets around the world. Too many to list them all but here is a selection of news reports of last week’s appeal hearing. Some reports contain factual errors in content but generally accurate on proceedings. Click on the title …………..
THE TIMES [paywall]
TIME [which I hesitated to include here due to mis-pronouns under the picture]
The Appeal Court decision has been deferred and I do not expect to hear anything further for the next few weeks. I anticipate an announcement within six to eight weeks and I advise anyone with an interest in the case to follow me on Twitter where the handed down decision will be announced in the first instance.
Last year’s High Court decision was handed down two months after the hearing in April 2018.
It has been a very long and exhausting wait for justice. I am pleased with how the proceedings went but I’ve suffered too many setbacks and disappointments to allow myself to think the battle for ‘X’ PASSPORTS might finally be over. I want my appeal to succeed because I desperately need closure on this particularly difficult issue that has become a focal point of my campaign however I am prepared to continue these proceedings if necessary.
The denial of existence is the worst act of discrimination by the gendered majority against the non-gendered