 |
|
Notifications
|
|
Firstly a point in history, Preamble
Legislation and Legal Judgements Impacting Trans People
Sexual Offences Act 1967
This Act decriminalised homosexuality – though actually resulted in an increase in convictions for homosexuality. This was because it allowed sex between consenting adult men over the age of 21 only provided nobody else was in the same building – therefore two men taking a room in a hotel. living in shared accomodation, flat share or tower blocks were often reported, and subsequently raided and arrested. Since transsexual women were treated as male until after surgery – even if they were living and presenting as female -- many were arrested under this law, as homosexual men.
Then Catastrophe, Corbett v Corbett 1970
In 1970, April Ashley’s divorce made matters worse. Until then, post-surgery trans women had been able to change their birth certificates unofficially, to reflect their acquired gender. However, in the court case annulling her marriage to Arthur Corbett (Corbett v Corbett ), Justice Ormrod determined that trans people could not ever change sex, and therefore even after full gender reassignment, trans people remained legally in their birth gender. This made them unable to marry, and inhumanely treated in all legal matters, including imprisonment.
In 1999 the Human Rights commission passed discrimination and equalities laws regarding Gays, Lesbians and Transexual people. basically the UK ignored these rules until a case put before the ECHR (European Courts of Human rights. Goodwin v. UK and I v UK (2002)
The European Court of Human Rights held that the UK government’s failure to alter the birth certificates of transsexual people or to allow them to marry in their new gender role was a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. This led directly to new legislation to once again clarify and restrict the extent of the judgement. Things really did not change much from 1967 - 2002 When the UK was forced to start preparing a Gender Recognition Act.
Prior to the GRA coming into force, one could not change their gender on the passport, because it was linked to their birth certificate, one had a doctors letter to explain the change of name and the contradictory gender marker.
Prior to the Corbet V Corbet (April Ashley) 1970 one could change their gender on their birth certificate, but during the a/m divorce the judge ruled . that because at the time of registration the gender marker on a birth certificate was a true fact, at the time of registration it could not be changed, the marriage was annulled, as being unlawful (The marriage was void ab initio) This also applied to passports regarding birth gender being a true fact at registration, Which set back trans rights some 35 years. In this forum there are case histories that brought about the advent of the GRA.
A Deed Poll is a legal document - not a certificate. It is a form of legal contract but it differs from legal contracts between two or more parties in that it only concerns one person (and it is only signed by that person in the presence of a witness). A Deed Poll legally binds the person who signs it to a particular course of action as detailed on the Deed Poll document.
Although Deed Poll documents are used for various purposes relating to an individual or a company legally committing themselves to doing something, they have one generally accepted meaning, that is, a change of name. However, the correct legal name for a deed that has been drawn up to change someone's name is a Deed of Change of Name (but more commonly known as a Deed Poll).
A Deed Poll for a change of name contains three declarations and by executing the Deed Poll (signing, dating and having your signing witnessed) you are legally committing yourself to:
Abandoning the use of your former name;
Using your new name only at all times;
Requiring all persons to address you by your new name only and most important to use/address you by any revised gender marker.
.
The term "deed", also known in this context as a "specialty", is common to signed written agreements not supported by consideration: the seal (even if not a literal wax seal but only a notional one referred to by the execution formula, "signed, sealed and delivered", or even merely "executed as a deed") is deemed to be the consideration necessary to support the contract between the parties to the deed.
"Poll" is an archaic legal term referring to documents with straight edges; these distinguished a deed binding only one person from one affecting more than a single person (an "indenture", so named during the time when such agreements would be written out repeatedly on a single sheet, then irregularly torn or "indented" so that each party had a document with corresponding tears, so as to discourage forgery).
Unlike the law today, it used to be that a Christian name (i.e. the name given at baptism) could only be changed under ecclesiastical law by the bishop on that person's subsequent confirmation. However, the case of Re Parrott, Cox v Parrott [1946] Ch 183, [1946] 1 All ER 321 provides that a Christian name can be changed if the following words are inserted therein 'Notwithstanding the decision of Mr Justice Vaisey in the case of Re Parrott's Will Trust, Cox v Parrott, the applicant desires the enrolment to proceed."
Legislation and Legal Judgements Impacting Trans People
Sexual Offences Act 1967 This Act decriminalised homosexuality – though actually resulted in an increase in convictions for homosexuality. This was because it allowed sex between consenting adult men over the age of 21 only provided nobody else was in the same building – therefore two men taking a room in a hotel. living in shared accommodation, flat share or tower blocks were often reported, and subsequently raided and arrested. Since transsexual women were treated as male until after surgery – even if they were living and presenting as female -- many were arrested under this law, as homosexual men.
2004 The UK Gender Recognition act was presented to parliament, subsequently in the house of Lords where it was slashed/amended excusing discrimination on religious grounds, (not in this Church)
3.5 Passports
The Passports Act 2008, section 11, offers an important avenue for recognition of the acquired gender of a transsexual person. For this purpose, a person who is transsexual may seek a passport in their new name and have their new sex entered therein. This does not confer any right or entitlement not connected with the purposes of the Passports Act. For instance, it would not alter the legal gender of the person for the purpose of marriage law or entitle one to a reissued birth certificate noting the acquired gender. which is a consideration for The Gender Recognition Panel.
Obviously once a person has completed RLE and been issued with their GRC, entitlement is automatic. the issue of a new birth certificate with a new gender marker, allowing person to marry. enter into a legal marriage, (not to be confused with a same sex marriage or a civil partnership), since spring 2015 there is in force an amendment to the marriage act amendment 2013, mutual agreement for for continuance of an existing marriage (automatically registered as a same sex, legal marriage), so the relevant changes to names and gender on passports should be taken into consideration,
Over the following years we have seen valuable amendments and right's added which also caused ratification of rights in the passport acts, marriage act, 2010 & 2013 and the right to remain married when applying for a Gender Recognition Certificate, by means of a mutual agreement form, avoiding the distress of having to obtain a divorce, automatically changing the marriage to a same sex marriage , amended certificate being issued alongside the new birth certificate.
https://gendersociety.com/forums/32/uk-transgender-law