Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Court cases/Judicial Reviews/ET/ETAs

290 replies

ArabellaScott · 02/10/2023 12:07

A thread of court cases involving people with 'gender critical' beliefs. So they are all in one place. I'll try and add links to court judgements where I can find them.

I'll add cases as I have time but please feel free to add others and/or remind me of any I've missed!

  1. Maria McLachlan, Tara Wolf. Assault by beating/battery.

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2018/04/27/trans-identified-male-tara-wolf-charged-assault-hyde-park-attack/

'Tara Wolf (also known as Tara Flik Wood), a trans-identified male, stood trial for striking 60-year-old Maria MacLachlan three times in Hyde Park on September 13th 2017, where women had gathered to attend a meeting called “We Need to Talk About Gender” at a yet-to-be-disclosed location. Wolf was found guilty of “assault by beating,” more commonly known as “battery.”'

Trans-identified male, Tara Wolf, convicted of assault after Hyde Park attack

Jen Izaakson reports from the courtroom, as Tara Wolf is tried for assaulting Maria MacLachlan.

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2018/04/27/trans-identified-male-tara-wolf-charged-assault-hyde-park-attack

OP posts:
Thread gallery
89
Original poster
ArabellaScott · 24/04/2025 10:25

https://open.substack.com/pub/tribunaltweets/p/sentinel-volume-8

A round up here from the fantastic Tribunal Tweets, of various court cases and open letters, etc.

OP posts:
Original poster
ArabellaScott · 16/04/2025 21:54

Bless you Signalbox!

OP posts:
Signalbox · 16/04/2025 21:16

16th April 2025
FWS (Appellant) v Scottish Ministers (Respondent)
Appeal Allowed.

https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc_2024_0042_press_summary_8a42145662.pdf

Fireworks GIF
NoBinturongsHereMate · 26/03/2025 22:22

Yes, I should have phrased that as 'for what they did to Doc Stock'.

SaffronSpice · 26/03/2025 22:20

NoBinturongsHereMate · 25/03/2025 22:30

Just saw that in the news, Signal. Half a million just for Doc Stock (and a discount for being the first one).

The OU must be feeling rather nervous.

Edited

Just to be clear, in case someone misunderstands, Doc Stock does not receive the money.

NoBinturongsHereMate · 25/03/2025 22:30

Just saw that in the news, Signal. Half a million just for Doc Stock (and a discount for being the first one).

The OU must be feeling rather nervous.

Signalbox · 25/03/2025 22:24

“An English university [Uni of Sussex] is set to be fined a record £585,000 over allegations it failed to uphold free speech and academic freedom, in a landmark ruling in the debate over student rights on campus.”

https://www.ft.com/content/d39f0db7-877a-4cf3-8c12-dd5581eecd0b

Archive

https://archive.is/yHVnG

England’s university regulator issues record fine in Sussex free speech case

Policies intended to prevent abuse or harassment of certain groups on campus had created ‘a chilling effect’, OfS says

https://www.ft.com/content/d39f0db7-877a-4cf3-8c12-dd5581eecd0b

BettyBooper · 22/03/2025 13:42

Just adding this here. Christian teacher sacked for saying LGBTQ+ a sin loses ET.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1lpy95y089o.amp

'The PCP hearing was told that Ms Leger's comments were recorded by an 11-year-old pupil, who had been advised by her mother to note down any "transphobic" remarks.
The mother then complained to the school, saying Ms Leger's comments were "very distressing" for her child.'

Blurred stock image of pupils in a class

Christian teacher loses court case over LGBT+ 'sin' comments - BBC News

Glawdys Leger challenged a ruling of unprofessional conduct over comments made to pupils in Bromley.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1lpy95y089o.amp

ChimpanzeeThatMonkeyNews · 22/03/2025 09:41

I've just checked Bailii, and i can't see the judgement there yet.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 22/03/2025 09:38

Signalbox · 22/03/2025 08:04

Peter Wilkins v Porton Down Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL)

As a scientist at Porton Down developing technology to secure Britain’s defences, Peter Wilkins never imagined he would be considered a threat because of a belief in biology.

But when he stated his gender-critical views and support for the concept of immutable sex, Wilkins was reported for his “ideology” and labelled by colleagues as transphobic, “sad and pathetic” and “a rubbish employee”.

An employment tribunal has found there was a “clear hostile animus” towards gender-critical beliefs at the top-secret Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL). It found that an intimidating atmosphere resulted in the harassment and discrimination of Wilkins, 43, who was forced to leave as a result….

https://www.thetimes.com/article/1c23cb7b-f144-4e57-8ab0-f9fc45ba7853?shareToken=2b6ead68d247452a896839234bda5d0d

Archive…

https://archive.ph/5exEA

Fantastic! Any link to the judgment, it doesn’t seem to be in the article. I’ll have a poke about later but travelling at the moment.

ChimpanzeeThatMonkeyNews · 22/03/2025 08:38

'Senior officials failed to address the behaviour because of an "unblinking desire" to support the pro-
trans lobby'.

'Senior staff did not stop the harassment, the tribunal found. Management viewed Prism, the DSTL sexual orientation and gender identity network, "as a powerful force within the organisation and were loath to do anything to go against [or] upset that body".'

Well, you could knock me down with a feather! 🙄

I think I'm going to have a heart attack and die, from not surprise.

Signalbox · 22/03/2025 08:04

Peter Wilkins v Porton Down Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL)

As a scientist at Porton Down developing technology to secure Britain’s defences, Peter Wilkins never imagined he would be considered a threat because of a belief in biology.

But when he stated his gender-critical views and support for the concept of immutable sex, Wilkins was reported for his “ideology” and labelled by colleagues as transphobic, “sad and pathetic” and “a rubbish employee”.

An employment tribunal has found there was a “clear hostile animus” towards gender-critical beliefs at the top-secret Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL). It found that an intimidating atmosphere resulted in the harassment and discrimination of Wilkins, 43, who was forced to leave as a result….

https://www.thetimes.com/article/1c23cb7b-f144-4e57-8ab0-f9fc45ba7853?shareToken=2b6ead68d247452a896839234bda5d0d

Archive…

https://archive.ph/5exEA

Porton Down scientist forced out over gender beliefs wins legal battle

The tribunal found a ‘clear hostile animus’ towards Peter Wilkins, who worked at Porton Down, expressed gender-critical views

https://www.thetimes.com/article/1c23cb7b-f144-4e57-8ab0-f9fc45ba7853?shareToken=2b6ead68d247452a896839234bda5d0d

Harassedevictee · 25/02/2025 14:08

@Signalbox that is good news.

Signalbox · 25/02/2025 13:05

Ryan Castellucci has lost his appeal to be recognised as non-binary in UK law...

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Castellucci-v-Gender-Recognition-Panel.pdf

Court cases/Judicial Reviews/ET/ETAs
SinnerBoy · 23/02/2025 13:51

I agree, Eresh It seems ironic that they - as you say - managed to lose on both sides. I wonder if they'll apply their lessons and sort their disciplinary procedures out?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2025 13:41

I agree Afreena was awful, and if they'd followed a reasonable and fair procedure to discipline her she probably wouldn't have had a case. But they mismanaged it in a similar way to ones which have been mismanaged on our side of the equation. ACE look really awful here, they managed to lose on both sides.

NoBinturongsHereMate · 23/02/2025 13:40

I don't think the judgement does substantially rest on that. It rests on steps being skipped in the process, and questionable reasons for involving certain members of staff (or for them involving themselves).

The ET is not a continuation of the disciplinary process. The claimant is not on trial, so the content of the comment isn't really material to the unfair dismissal part of the judgement - which was the only part upheld.

Original poster
ArabellaScott · 23/02/2025 13:19

'This judgement wrongly accepts Afreena Islam-Wright’s claim that she was not aiming her written comment, comparing being gender critical to racism, at anyone in particular. The evidence speaks for itself. She was aiming it at me, her colleague.
...
Afreena's comment was not, as the Judgement states, a 'hasty, ill-informed and ill-thought through' comment, 'not intended to cause the hurt and upset which it did'. Afreena quoted my words deliberately and with purpose, and was referring to me as equivalent to a racist.
...
The judgement in Afreena’s favour substantially rests on a belief that she was sincere in claiming she did not target anyone. But she did – she was targeting me and that’s why she used my words, written weeks earlier.'

From Denise Fahmy, on X.

x.com/DeniseFahmy/status/1892630255443054660

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2025 13:10

Exactly. Most of these cases hinge on processes not being followed fairly.

NoBinturongsHereMate · 23/02/2025 13:08

I don't see what grounds they'd have for appeal. The judgement is that they didn't follow process, and it's very clear that they didn't.

NoBinturongsHereMate · 23/02/2025 13:06

dimwit virtue signalling on behalf of her friends and what she personally thought was progressive

I agree. Under the range of disciplinary options they set out, the proportionate response would have been a chat with her line manager and some EA training.

NoBinturongsHereMate · 23/02/2025 13:03

My reading of that is encouraging for Peggie v Fife NHS. Both the explanation of what constitutes a protected act, and the importance of always following process.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2025 11:33

I'm not sure they will.

Original poster
ArabellaScott · 23/02/2025 11:23

Denise Fahmy is urging ACE to appeal.

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2025 11:21

I read the judgement. They didn't handle the disciplinary process well at all, and she just comes across as a bit of a dimwit virtue signalling on behalf of her friends and what she personally thought was progressive, there were people who said much worse things. I think it was probably the right decision.

What I think it shows is that all these issues where possible should not be encouraged to create divisiveness in the workplace.