• January 2022: matter brought to the
Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) by Roxanne Tickle, a
transgender woman from
New South Wales who was denied membership of the site. AHRC initially offered conciliation between the parties, but those efforts were unsuccessful. • May 2022: matter filed in the
Federal Circuit Court following the complaint. • July 2022: case was, without explanation, dropped, as Tickle sought to discontinue all of the orders. • December 2023: case reopened by Tickle. Tickle was granted $50,000 from
Grata Fund, a not-for-profit
legal fund associated with
University of New South Wales, to cover costs associated with the case. • April 2024: hearing began before Justice
Robert Bromwich with Giggle and Grover represented by Bridie Nolan. The court was required to examine the application of the Australian government's 2013 amendments to the 1984
Sex Discrimination Act. The amendments, which relate to gender identity, have not been tested in court prior to this case. The court's decision was expected to determine if the social networking app may be considered as a special measure to advance women's equality under the Sex Discrimination Act, where the exclusion of men is permitted under law. The hearing concluded after several days of arguments. • The
Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) participated in the legal case by sending representatives to the court, including Anna Cody, the
Sex Discrimination Commissioner. The commission's role in the case was extended as a 'friend of the court' (
amicus curiae) to clarify the provisions in Australia's
Sex Discrimination Act. Alsalem's paper discussed the definition of "woman" in international human rights treaties, particularly the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Alsalem argues that while CEDAW does not explicitly define "woman", it refers to individuals assigned female at birth and that sex and sex-based discrimination in that context is understood as a biological category. • In discussing his reasoning, Bromwich refuted Grover's arguments that sex was unchangeable, finding "These arguments failed because the view propounded by the respondents conflicted with a long history of cases decided by courts going back over 30 years. Those... cases established that on its ordinary meaning sex is changeable". • Bromwich also refuted both the constitutional challenges raised by Grover. Grover contended that section 22 of the
Sex Discrimination Act was outside of the scope of Commonwealth authority, and so discrimination based on gender identity was not actionable under the constitution. Bromwich found that "section 22 is supported by the Commonwealth's external affairs power, as an enactment of Article 26 of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (1966)", specifically as it states "the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status". Bromwich considered "other status" to encompass gender identity. • The second constitutional challenge made by Grover was that there was "inconsistency between the Births, Deaths and Marriages Act 1994 (Qld) and the SDA". Bromwich found that there was no inconsistency, and that the "two statutes can and do operate harmoniously". • August 2025: Proceedings began in the Federal Court. • 4 August 2025: Proceedings begin. Giggle's legal team is led by Noel Hutley SC, and Tickle's team by Georgina Costello KC. Several parties were granted intervener status in the case including the
Sex Discrimination Commissioner Anna Cody, Equality Australia, and the Lesbian Action Group. == References ==