The judge in 'Billboard' Chris Elston's directions hearing declared that a biological woman be addressed with male pronouns in court.

The call was made during a session on Thursday, which also debated the involvement of trans activist Teddy Cook in the case against Australia's eSafety Commissioner.

The @eSafetyOffice ordered my post taken down partly because I called Teddy Cook a woman.

Now in the appeal, before anything has even really started, the judge says we can’t call Teddy Cook a woman.

I will not be complying with this. Teddy Cook is a woman. Find me in contempt.… https://t.co/kn7oVgMLa4

— Billboard Chris 🇨🇦🇺🇸 (@BillboardChris) May 24, 2024

Dr Reuben Kirkham of the Free Speech Union of Australia, representing Elston, was scolded for using female pronouns when referring to Cook in the court.

"It was an 'interesting' experience - the instruction was to use 'he' or 'Teddy Cook' (we opted for the latter). It was a Federal Court Judge sitting in the AAT - who then went on to call Cook 'they' several times. The cognitive dissonance doesn't help the proceedings," the Free Speech Union posted on social media after the hearing.

It was an 'interesting' experience - the instruction was to use 'he' or 'Teddy Cook' (we opted for the latter). It was a Federal Court Judge sitting in the AAT - who then went on to call Cook 'they' several times. The cognitive dissonance doesn't help the proceedings. https://t.co/Q0jirjRsQm

— Free Speech Union of Australia (@FSUofAustralia) May 23, 2024

The court eventually ruled that Cook would not be a party to the proceedings and should not be named in tribunal documents. Discussions also covered whether X Corp should remain an interested party. The Judge decided to keep the matters separate but ordered that documents be shared between them, with hearings held concurrently unless confidentiality orders are imposed.

Kirkham argued that the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman-Grant, was prolonging the case unnecessarily, advocating for a more expedited timeline. The judge has instructed all parties to file a certificate stating the matter is ready for hearing by 28 August.

The Australian government has ordered my tweet below to be taken down. @X can face a fine of up to $782,500 AUD if they do not comply.

I don’t know if any civil action or fine can be directed at me under that law.

A delegate for the eSafety Commissioner says “an ordinary… https://t.co/AApAMktPwR pic.twitter.com/2iqfsKA1uC

— Billboard Chris 🇨🇦🇺🇸 (@BillboardChris) March 26, 2024

Elston, a Canadian, has a history of anti-child mutilation activism and recently had a post removed by X Corp, following an order from the eSafety Commissioner.

The post mentioned Cook, which led to the threat of an $800,000 fine. X Corp complied but is legally challenging the removal order, citing free speech concerns.