The UK Supreme Court has backed the Government’s decision to not allow gender-neutral passports.

Earlier this year, justices heard an appeal from campaigner Christie Elan-Cane who says that the UK’s passport application process, which requires individuals to indicate whether they are male or female, breaches human rights laws.

Last year, the Court of Appeal ruled it was ‘beyond argument’ that Elan-Cane’s right to respect for private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was engaged, but that the current policy did not amount to an unlawful breach.

In a judgment today, the Supreme Court unanimously agreed, and dismissed Elan-Cane’s appeal.

Giving the ruling, Lord Reed said: ‘The form is concerned with the applicants’ gender as a biographical detail which can be used to confirm their identity by checking it against the birth, adoption or gender recognition certificates provided and other official records.

‘It is therefore the gender recognised for legal purposes and recorded in those documents which is relevant.’

The President of the Supreme Court found that Elan-Cane’s interest in being issued with an ‘X’ passport was ‘outweighed’ by other considerations, including ‘maintaining a coherent approach across government’ as to what genders are recognised.