-
Only if you haven't read the legislation. Gender ('gender reassignment' in the act) and Sex are both distinctly defined in the act and the interaction between the two is well thought out. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about whether there's a difference between what we colloquially refer to as 'gender' protections for trans/non binary/gender fluid people, and 'gender reassignment' protections. To me they're the same thing.
ReekBlefs-
I don't think most people have read the legislation. So it's important to be clear about what's in it. I can't see the original post that this all started with.
The Land Rover case is interesting, I'd heard of it but not read a summary of it. Clearly she had a case against them as she'd been treated really badly and it's good that employers are now on notice that simply having good-sounding policies in place isn't enough. Worth noting that she'd changed her presentation quite substantially, so it could be interpreted as extending the protection to gender-non-conformity (which would be seen as a good thing by a lot of people).
ffm
Generally the error that people make is to substitute "gender" in for "sex" when describing protected characteristics. How "gender reassignment" is interpreted is a different question.