Bad Law, Worse History and the Role of the Court: Re-reading For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers

The narrative study of law has offered important insights through which to consider the enumeration of law, its grounding and in particular its interpretation by the Courts. In this article, I situate all of this with relation to the recent judgement of the UK Supreme Court in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers. I utilise a narrative understanding of law to deconstruct and problematise many of the premises adopted by the Supreme Court that enabled their conclusions, and, in particular, the way in which the Court leverages anachronistic precedent in order to construct a veil of legitimacy. It is from this basis that I recontextualise the judgement. In doing so, I address those perspectives which were neglected by the Supreme Court, notably any meaningful consideration of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the combined discrimination provision of the Equality Act 2010.