DISCRIMINATION AND EQUALITY

Armstrong v The London Mathematical Society 

 

Our client, an academic at King's College London, threatened to launch legal action against the LMS for its new trans-inclusion policy, which advises that, in breach of the Equality Act, men who identify as women can use the facilities they feel most comfortable with, and members are warned against the failure to use ‘correct’ pronouns. The guidance has since been withdrawn.  CONCLUDED 

X v Girlguiding 

Originally a discrimination case brought by a mother (who wishes to remain anonymous) who claimed that Girlguiding’s policies permitting boys and men who identified as girls or women to participate as members and volunteers were unlawful in the light of the Supreme Court decision For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16.  Following three pre-action protocol letters, Girlguiding withdrew its previous guidance, stopped admitting biological boys as members and biological men to women-only volunteer roles, introduced clearer sex-based safeguarding arrangements for sleeping, changing and shower facilities, and withdrew guidance which suggested that volunteers may not ask whether a child or adult volunteer is transgender.  The remaining dispute concerns whether Girlguiding’s trustees can demonstrate that these revised policies relating to safeguarding are capable of being implemented consistently in practice throughout the organisation.  ONGOING

​​
​​X & Y v A Brighton School & Brighton & Hove City Council​​

​​

This is the first case to consider the lawfulness of policies regarding single sex spaces in secondary schools.  It will have national implications for the way in which schools handle their trans-identifying students and protect their female students in particular.  Our clients, who wish to remain anonymous, are bringing a judicial review claim against a school in Brighton and against Brighton & Hove City Council for its policy on use of toilets and changing rooms.  Currently the school permits, on a case-by-case basis, boys who identify as girls to use the girls’ changing rooms and toilets.  This is unlawful and the school and Council are breaching their safeguarding obligations.  We are alleging indirect discrimination against, and harassment of, girls, who are required to change in front of biological boys.  Permission to proceed to judicial review has been granted and the hearing date is in November.  ONGOING

​

Green Women’s Declaration v The Green Party​​​

 

Ground-breaking challenge to the discriminatory policy and practice by the Green Party against long-serving members who hold gender critical views.   The Green Women Declaration was refused permission to run a ‘sex realist’ stall at the Green Party Autumn Conference and are alleging discrimination. This is against a backdrop of wider hostility including suspensions and expulsions from the Green Party of many who hold the view that biological sex is real.  ONGOING

​

Flaherty v UNISON​​​

 

We represented a UNISON member who objected to the union allowing a male who identifies as female to stand for a position on the NEC which is reserved for females (specifically in this context, disabled females).  UNISON, which has a membership of over 80% female, has a policy of reserving some seats for women and low-paid members to ensure that the make-up of the NEC fairly represents the wider union.  Since the For Women Scotland decision, ‘female’ must be interpreted as ‘biological female’.  In a significant decision for the union sector, the Certification Officer found in favour of our client and invited trade unions and employers’ associations to review their rules, procedures and guidance to ensure compliance with For Women Scotland.  CONCLUDED

​​​

​