Court cases/Judicial Reviews/ET/ETAs

[ArabellaScott]

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.”'

Kate Scottow, CPS:

successful appeal against conviction: ' offence of improper use of a public communications network, contrary to section 127(2)(c) of the Communications Act 2003'

'A mother has successfully appealed a conviction over calling a transgender woman a man on Twitter.
Kate Scottow, 39, was arrested in December 2018 at her home in front of her then ten-year-old daughter and 20-month-old son.
The arrest followed a number of complaints from activist Stephanie Hayden, 47, who alleged Mrs Scottow had sent tweets referring to her as 'he' or 'him' during a period of 'significant online abuse'.
Mrs Scottow had referred to Miss Hayden online as 'a pig in a wig' and had labelled her a racist from an account under the name 'Busted Wench'.
St Albans magistrates' court found Mrs Scottow guilty of persistently using a public communications network to cause annoyance and anxiety in February.
But yesterday the mother of two revealed she had been successful in her appeal against the conviction. '

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9041725/Mum-called-trans-woman-Twitter-CLEARED-wrongdoing.html

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Scottow-v-CPS-judgment-161220.pdf

Maya Forstater:

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/maya-forstater-v-cgd-europe-and-others-2200909-2019

'The Tribunal (Employment Judge Tayler) had decided at a preliminary
hearing that the Claimant’s belief was not protected under the Equality Act 2010.
Ms Forstater appealed against that judgment and the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the appeal, deciding that the relevant belief is protected. The present hearing was therefore listed in order to determine all of the other issues on liability.

1. In paragraph 1 of its judgment the Employment Appeal Tribunal (Choudhury

P presiding) summarised Ms Forstater’s belief in the following terms. “The Claimant holds the belief that biological sex is real, important, immutable and not to be conflated with gender identity. She considers that statements such as “woman means adult human female” or “trans women are male” are statements of neutral fact and are not expressions of antipathy towards trans people or “transphobic”.'

'On the 10 June 2021 in Maya Forstater v CGD Europe UKEAT/0105/20/JOJ, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that gender-critical beliefs, such as the view that sex is fixed and should not be conflated with gender identity, did qualify for protection under the Equality Act 2010 (Equality Act). This means that “gender critical” beliefs are protected “philosophical beliefs” for equality law purposes.'

https://www.jmw.co.uk/services-for-you/employment-law/blog/what-does-decision-forstater-v-cgd-mean-employers

I've actually just now realised the scope of this thread and perhaps have bitten off more than I can chew. Also, there are various court cases that maybe don't involve anyone with 'gender critical views' but may be relevant, directly or indirectly.

<gulps>

Anyway.

Miller v College of Policing.

https://www.mountfordchambers.com/miller-v-college-of-policing-social-media-non-crime-hate-incidents-and-the-right-to-freedom-of-expression/

'On 20 December 2021, the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in R (on the application of Miller) v College of Policing[2021] EWCA Civ 1926. In a judgment which may have significant implications for policing and professional regulators, the Court found that the appellant’s right to freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR had been infringed by 2014 Guidance on the recording of non-crime hate incidents.'

Allison Bailey v Garden Court Chambers and Stonewall:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-62294030

'A barrister has been awarded £22,000 after winning part of a tribunal claim that she was discriminated against because of her gender-critical views.
Allison Bailey, a barrister at Garden Court Chambers (GCC) in London, said her views wrongly resulted in her being labelled as transphobic, in 2019.
GCC was found to have discriminated against her by tweeting it would investigate her tweets that rejected the idea biological sex can change.
She lost her case against Stonewall.'

https://www.doyleclayton.co.uk/resources/news/allison-bailey-wins-costs-award/

'In 2022, Miss Bailey won discrimination and victimisation claims against Garden Court based on her gender critical beliefs and was awarded injury to feelings compensation and aggravated damages. Her separate claim that LGBTQ charity Stonewall induced, caused or instructed the unlawful discrimination was unsuccessful.
The hearing in the case, which ran for 23 days, was marred by a dysfunctional bundle in which documents were not indexed, properly arranged, searchable or sequentially arranged. This substantially increased the time and costs for all sides.

General summation of three cases involving 'gender critical' beliefs:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/employment-tribunal-rulings-on-gender-critical-beliefs-in-the-workplace/

Kristie Higgs v Farmor's School

This is one I hadn't heard about before, and it isn't 'gender critical' beliefs but religious ones. In any case, freedom of belief seems relevant.

Higgs lost her first case, won an appeal, and I believe this is now being sent back for a rehearing. So still in progress.

'[Higgs] has now won an appeal against the decision after a judge ruled 'the freedom to manifest belief (religious or otherwise)... are essential rights in any democracy'.

'Posting on Facebook under her maiden name, she shared two posts in October 2018 to around 100 friends. An anonymous complaint about the posts was made to the school and Mrs Higgs was later suspended and sacked.
The school had denied dismissing Mrs Higgs because of her religious beliefs and said she was sacked because of the language used in the posts.
In response, she launched legal action for discrimination and harassment on the grounds of her Christian beliefs.
In a judgment released last Friday, Mrs Justice Eady overturned a ruling in October 2020 which had upheld the sacking.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12210167/Christian-teaching-assistant-wins-appeal-sacked.html

https://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/mrs-kristie-higgs-v-1-farmors-school-2-archbishops-council-of-the-church-of-england-2023-eat-89-eat-89

Denise Fahmy v Arts Council England:

'In a unanimous judgment of the Leeds Employment Tribunal Ms Fahmy succeeds in her case that she was subjected to harassment for her gender critical beliefs.
Denise was initially a litigant in person but instructed both didlaw and Ms Palmer shortly before her final Employment Tribunal (ET) hearing in May 2023. Judgment was reserved after the hearing and delivered on 26 June 2023 confirming that Denise’s claim for ‘harassment related to the protected characteristic of religion or belief is well-founded and succeeds’. She was also awarded an uplift to her compensation (which the ET indicated should be in the order of 10%) for ACE’s failure to follow the Acas Code of Practice when it refused Denise the right to appeal the outcome of a Dignity at Work complaint.'

https://didlaw.com/denise-fahmy-v-arts-council-england

David Mackareth v DWP

'David Mackereth brought an employment tribunal claim of discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief against DWP.
The tribunal found his gender critical beliefs did not meet the Grainger criteria for protected beliefs under the Equality Act and that, even if they did, no discrimination occurred.
On appeal, in Dr David Mackereth v The Department of Work and Pensions (1) Advanced Personnel Management Group (UK) Limited (2): [2022] EAT 99, the EAT found David Mackereth’s gender critical beliefs did meet the Grainger threshold for protection but, nevertheless, that no direct or indirect discrimination took place.
This was because the employer would have treated any worker who refused to address service users in their preferred way the same and the policies of the employer “were necessary and proportionate to meet a legitimate focus on the needs of potentially vulnerable service users”.
The EAT noted the claimant’s gender critical beliefs (protected under the Act) were distinct from how those beliefs manifested in him refusing to use peoples’ preferred forms of address (behaviour which was not protected).'

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/employment-tribunal-rulings-on-gender-critical-beliefs-in-the-workplace/

Shahrar Ali v Green Party of England and Wales:

Ongoing.

'The former deputy leader of the Green Party has told a court he was forced out of his party role due to his "gender-critical" beliefs.
Dr Shahrar Ali is suing the party, claiming it discriminated against him on account of his beliefs, the first time an activist has sued his or her own party over this issue.
The Green Party of England and Wales denies discrimination.
It says he was removed because he had become a "divisive force" in the party.
The party removed Dr Ali as spokesman for policing and domestic safety in February 2022.'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66585309

Sonia Appleby v Tavistock and Portman:

'A woman who raised concerns about the safety of children at an NHS gender clinic has been awarded £20,000 in an employment tribunal case.
Sonia Appleby is children's safeguarding lead for Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust, which runs the Gender Identity Development Service.
The tribunal ruled that the way the trust treated her had damaged her professional reputation.
...
The tribunal concluded that Ms Appleby was subjected to "quasi disciplinary treatment" and there was "obvious unfairness" in the way she had been dealt with by the trust.'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58453250

Tribunal tweets have a link to the judgment and further info:

https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/sonia-appleby-vs-gender-identity

Rachel Meade v Westminster City Council and Social Work England

'Social worker of 20 years, Rachel Meade, is bringing her employer, Westminster City Council, and professional regulatory body, Social Work England (SWE), to an employment tribunal due to discrimination on the basis of her protected beliefs under the Equality Act 2010.
In June 2020, a friend of RM raised concerns with SWE about her posts in a private group on social media. RM had shared posts about upholding women's rights from various organisations, during the then reform consultation for the Gender Recognition Act 2004.
In July 2021, Social Work England's investigation found the posts to be ‘discriminatory’ and ‘disgusting’ and sanctioned RM for 12 months, ruling that her ‘fitness to practise is impaired by way of misconduct’. RM was then suspended by her employer, with a warning that she was at risk of being dismissed for misconduct.
In October 2022, days before a ‘fitness to practice’ hearing on the sanction, Social Work England sought and was granted a discontinuance stating it did not intend to defend its position.'

https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/rm-v-westminster-city-council-and-bda

Reconvening in November, possibly judgement in early New Year.

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/ms-r-meade-v-westminster-city-council-and-social-work-england-2200179-slash-2022-and-2211483-slash-2022

Dave McConnell vs Crown Prosecution Service:

Conviction overturned on appeal, awaiting an appeal from CPS.

Again, one I don't know much about. Tribunal Tweets are a fantastic resource.

'Dave McConnell, 42, from Wakefield, was the first street preacher to be prosecuted and reported to counter-terrorism for alleged ‘misgendering’, is appealing his conviction this week at Leeds Crown Court.
Mr. McConnell was reported by the Probation Service to the government’s counter-terrorism watchdog, Prevent, after he was arrested under section 4A Public Order Act 1986 and convicted for ‘offending’ a member of the public in Leeds City Centre on 8 June 2021.He was convicted, made to pay costs of £620, forced to do 80 hours of community service and reported to Prevent.
StatusThe appeal hearing was heard at Leeds Crown Court on 9th March 2023.
The conviction was overturned on appeal. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has granted leave to appeal.'

https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/dave-mcconnell-vs-crown

Good work Arabella x

I aten't finished! I had to stop to do some actual work. 😄

I see plenty of things that offend me in Leeds City centre but I bet if I complained I'd be ignored.

Good idea for a thread, Arabella. But I fear you will be right - you have bitten off more than you can chew.

I know! I didn't think it through! 😂

Still. I can try. I think it might be useful to have as many court judgements/ETA/ET decisions gathered in one place as possible.

I think this is a good idea. I'm always forgetting the sheer volume of cases. And there'll be plenty more to come. Loads lined up for the next year.

Raquel Rosario Sanchez (number 1)
Suffered bullying and harassment at Bristol Uni whilst completing her PhD.
Judge found that...

"while acknowledging there had been occasions where she had been subjected to threats of violence, judge Alexander Ralton dismissed all of her claims against the university in his verdict delivered on Thursday, saying "no actionable breach of duty has been identified".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-61179937

It's very helpful, and a great idea as an ongoing project. Will be a valuable resource. Thanks!

Raquel Rosario Sanchez (number 2)
RRS won this one with an out of court settlement in February 2023...

"Feminist student societies can exclude transgender women, university students’ union chiefs have admitted after “landmark” legal action.

Bristol Students’ Union (SU) caused anger by disciplining Women Talk Back (WTB), its own feminist group, for excluding male-born trans women from talks on rape and sexual assault.

The society had hosted women-only meetings at the University of Bristol to discuss male violence and argued that the presence of trans women could make attendees fearful of speaking out. However, a student later complained.

Following an investigation, in Feb 2021 Bristol SU demanded that Raquel Rosario Sanchez, its president, stand down before banning her from leadership posts for two years and ordering an “equality, diversity and inclusion” course for the society.

In response, four members of WTB took legal action, arguing in Bristol County Court papers that Bristol SU had “denied them their rights under the Equality Act, discriminated against the claimants, subjected them to detriments, treated them less favourably, harassed and victimised them”.

Now, Bristol SU has backed down and admitted that “affiliated clubs and societies may lawfully offer single-sex services and be constituted as single-sex associations” under the Equality Act."

https://archive.ph/xP1zy

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/02/04/feminist-student-societies-universities-can-exclude-trans-women/

Lisa Keogh v Abertay University

Lisa was investigated, but cleared.

'A LAW student who was investigated by a Scottish university for saying women have vaginas and are not as strong as men has been cleared of any wrongdoing.

Lisa Keogh, 29, was investigated by Abertay University after classmates complained she had made “offensive” and “discriminatory” remarks at a lecture.
She had argued the difference in strength between the sexes meant it was not fair that women should have to compete against trans women in sport
.
She has now received a letter from the Chair of the Student Disciplinary Board informing her all the complaints against her have been dismissed.'

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19359567.abertay-university-student-lisa-keogh-cleared-investigated-saying-women-vaginas/

Kellie-Jay Keen v CPS

'In February 2018 Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull was contacted by West Yorkshire Police after she posted tweets about Susie Green, CEO of trans charity Mermaids.
The tweets referred to Mrs Green taking her 16-year-old child to Thailand for sex reassignment surgery, which is a matter of public record.
Kellie-Jay was interviewed twice: first in February 2018 and then in December 2018 by her local force, Wiltshire Police. Although Susie Green had withdrawn her complaint by the time of the second interview, the case was nonetheless referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Eventually, Kellie-Jay found out from a journalist that no charges were to be brought.'

https://www.faircop.org.uk/case-studies/kellie-jay-keen-minshull/

Miranda Yardley v Helen Islan

'The country’s first prosecution for “transgender hate crime” collapsed when District Judge Woolard sitting at Basildon Magistrates Court ruled that there was no case to answer at the close of the prosecution evidence.
The complainant, Helen Islan, who works on behalf of the controversial charity Mermaids, alleged that the defendant was guilty of harassing her by potentially exposing her and her transgender child to bullying and abuse.'

https://www.2harecourt.com/2019/03/04/gudrun-young-secures-no-case-to-answer-in-controversial-first-prosecution-for-transgender-hate-crime/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6764763/Britains-transgender-hate-crime-trial-halted-one-day.html

Mermaids v LGB Alliance

Case dismissed.

'In June 2021, Mermaids, supported by a coalition of LGBT+ organisations, appealed the decision by the Charity Commission to register LGB Alliance (LGBA) as a charity. We argued that LGBA shouldn’t be recognised as a charity because it was focused on hostile anti-trans activism and not (as it claimed) on the promotion of lesbian, gay and bisexual rights.
The hearing took place over seven days in September and November 2022, and the Tribunal handed down its decision on Thursday 6 July 2023.
Their decision is that Mermaids doesn’t have legal standing to bring the appeal.'

https://mermaidsuk.org.uk/news/statement-on-the-ruling-in-mermaids-v-charity-commission-and-lgb-alliance/

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/charity-commission-responds-to-mermaidslgb-alliance-tribunal-verdict

Keira Bell v Tavistock (1)

'Children under 16 with gender dysphoria are unlikely to be able to give informed consent to undergo treatment with puberty-blocking drugs, three High Court judges have ruled.
The case was brought against Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust, which said it was "disappointed" but immediately suspended such referrals for under-16s.
The NHS said it "welcomed the clarity" the ruling would bring.'
...
'In a ruling, Dame Victoria Sharp, sitting with Lord Justice Lewis and Mrs Justice Lieven, said: "It is highly unlikely that a child aged 13 or under would be competent to give consent to the administration of puberty blockers.
"It is doubtful that a child aged 14 or 15 could understand and weigh the long-term risks and consequences of the administration of puberty blockers."

They added: "In respect of young persons aged 16 and over, the legal position is that there is a presumption that they have the ability to consent to medical treatment.
"Given the long-term consequences of the clinical interventions at issue in this case, and given that the treatment is as yet innovative and experimental, we recognise that clinicians may well regard these as cases where the authorisation of the court should be sought prior to commencing the clinical treatment."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-55144148

Appealed in 2021:

Overturned:

'Doctors can judge if under-16s can give informed consent to puberty blocker use, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
The appeal was brought by the Tavistock Trust, which runs the UK's only youth gender identity clinic.
The decision reverses a 2020 ruling that under-16s lacked capacity to give informed consent to the treatment, which delays the onset of puberty.
The original case was brought by Keira Bell, who says the clinic should have challenged her more over transitioning.
She said she was disappointed by the decision, and will seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.'

KB was not given permission to appeal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58598186

https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/bell-and-another-v-the-tavistock-and-portman-nhs-foundation-trust-and-others/