I'd have thought vaccine passports would be ripe for challenge under the equality act, surely, if there is no other way permitted of allowing you to "access the service"? Either for discriminating against people who can't have it on health/ disability grounds (who are still allowed to want to go to a nightclub, even if some may choose not to!) , or maybe even if not wanting the vaccine is classed as a religious belief, or something. It seems that the aim is to minimise the spread of covid in large events (first nightclubs, but presumably eventually concerts, festivals, theatres, conferences? As well as travel). But surely a negative test or antibody test could also do that. So the public health justification of the policy can be met in other ways, which should be equally acceptable. As we know by now, vaccination doesn't prevent it being spread anyway (reduces, but not stops) so it seems "herd immunity" caused by enough people having the vaccine is unlikely to get rid of the virus in the population. So it really should be the decision of the individual how they show their own immunity/ reduced likelihood of spreading it, rather than insisting on vaccination. Obviously I am not a lawyer, but it really doesn't seem fair to me.