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.”'

BC College of Nurses and Midwives - Amy Hamm

VANCOUVER, BC: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that the disciplinary panel of the British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives (College) has suspended Amy Hamm’s nursing license for one month, starting when she returns to nursing, and has ordered her to pay $93,639.80 in legal costs for her statements defending the right of women to access female-only spaces.
Ms. Hamm had worked in healthcare for over 13 years and had been promoted to be a nurse educator.
In 2020, she co-sponsored a Vancouver billboard that read, “I ♥ JK Rowling,” referencing the author’s support for women’s rights and the right of women to access female-only spaces, such as washrooms, crisis centres, sporting events, and prisons.
Following complaints from activists and a Vancouver city councillor, the billboard was removed, and two formal complaints were filed with the College accusing Ms. Hamm of transphobia and hate speech.
The College launched an investigation that led to a 332-page report examining Ms. Hamm’s public statements between 2018 and 2021, including tweets, articles, and podcasts.
The College’s Inquiry Committee argued that Ms. Hamm had made discriminatory and derogatory comments about transgender people while identifying as a nurse. After 22 days of hearings spanning a year and a half, the College’s disciplinary panel ruled that four of her statements amounted to unprofessional conduct.
Ms. Hamm has already appealed the College’s finding of unprofessional conduct to the Supreme Court of British Columbia. Her lawyer, Lisa Bildy, noted, “In our view, the panel made a number of legal and factual errors that make the decision unsound, and we look forward to arguing these points before the BC Supreme Court. We are now considering whether to appeal the penalty decision as well.”
“This decision effectively penalizes a nurse for expressing mainstream views aligned with science and common sense,” continued Ms. Bildy. “The Panel’s ruling imposes a chilling effect on free expression for all regulated professionals.”
Ms. Hamm said, “The College has chosen to punish me for statements that are not hateful, but truthful. I’m appealing because biological reality matters, and so does freedom of expression. I want to express my thanks to the thousands of Canadians who continue to fund my legal case through donations to the Justice Centre.”

www.jccf.ca/bc-college-orders-amy-hamm-to-pay-93639-80/

That 'while identifying as a nurse' gets to me every time.

She wasn't identifying as a nurse, she is a nurse. But if they can't tell the difference between 'identifying as' and 'being identifiable as', that rather explains the mess they're in.

This was in July:

Newman v Met Police - claims of discrimination and harassment from Ms Newman, dismissed.

This was where Newman attended a training given by Eva Echo, Posie Parker's name was hissed/booed at.

The ET found she wasn't harassed or discriminated against.

However:

'Those who share the claimant’s beliefs now have their own network.
Some of those who opposed this measure have been issued with “words of advice”.
...
'the claimant’s claim has contributed to substantial changes in the manner in which the respondent accommodates gender critical beliefs and a review of the way in which it engages with external speakers across a broad spectrum of issues.'

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/ms-m-newman-v-commissioner-of-police-of-the-metropolis-2305069-slash-2023

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Newman-v-Commissioner-of-Police-of-the-Metropolis.pdf

Article in DIVA:

https://diva-magazine.com/2025/07/07/diva-award-winners-eva-echo-and-saba-ali-give-powerful-speeches-at-pride-in-london/

I missed this back in July. An overview of recent court cases, and how they've shifted the landscape in the UK. Cheering reading.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-pillars-of-sanity/

'When taken together ... the five watershed events detailed in this article have systematically detonated every one of the fundamental props supporting the capture of civic society in the UK by gender ideology.
FWS set the biological definition of sex into law. [Wings Over Scotland's] case enshrined the protection of free speech on trans issues. Allison Bailey ended the ability of organisations and businesses to discriminate against the gender-critical. Linzi Smith struck a deathblow to the infestation of every public body in the land with homophobic “Queer Theory” and enforced allegiance to it. And the confirmation of Mary-Ann Stephenson should ensure that the FWS judgment is fully implemented without fudging or backsliding.
The war is not yet over. While some will concede with the best grace they can muster, entities like the Good Law Project and a whole raft of activist “charities” and quangos lavishly funded by the Scottish Government will fight bitterly against reality for as long as they can in the name of self-preservation and their revenue streams.
But just as with the German army after Stalingrad, the die is cast and all they can do is slightly postpone the inevitable. The women (and men) who wouldn’t wheesht have won, and when the history books about the gender madness are written, the spring and summer of 2025 will be recorded as the time it all changed forever.'

“Britain’s foremost maths society has withdrawn its transgender inclusion policy in response to legal threats from one of its members.

“The Times revealed last month that John Armstrong, a senior lecturer in financial mathematics, probability and statistics at King’s College London, was threatening to sue the London Mathematical Society (LMS), over claims the policy discriminated against gender-critical people — those who believe that sex is a matter of biology that cannot be changed…”

https://www.thetimes.com/article/39292bf8-9602-4680-8094-54b8f0ff86aa?

Archive…

https://archive.ph/TzDJS

https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2025/1556?court=ewca%2Fciv

Susan Evans, R (on the application of) & Anor v Gender Plus Healthcare Limited & Ors

'Permission is refused as none of the grounds of appeal have a realistic prospect of succeeding and there is no other compelling reason for allowing an appeal to proceed.'

Kelly v Leonardo uk ltd.

Case dismissed.

Judgment

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/b-m-kelly-v-leonardo-uk-ltd-8001497-slash-2024

BBC article

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4ge29yl7zdo.amp

“In her ruling, Judge Michelle Sutherland said the toilet policy was a "proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim" to create an inclusive workplace environment for trans staff.”

It’s as if FWS never happened.

This is my Number 1 crowdfunder in the next few months.

Yeah, this is important, cos it looks very overturnable, doesn't it?

However only 0.05% of the female workforce had complained or raised a concern about the policy (i.e. the claimant) and it cannot therefore be said that all women considered that their dignity and privacy had been sacrificed.

That thing where all the women who complained, everywhere, got called bigots and fascists? Yeah...

One woman wanting the space to be single-sex is enough for it to be kept single-sex. It's a matter to be resolved by veto, not by vote.

Sheesh! That has to go to appeal, hasn't it? An error on a point of law? That SSS means SSS.

I'm inclined to think it's a good thing it's going to go to appeal.

Because we know what happens to ETA judgements.

'Judge Michelle Sutherland said the toilet policy was a "proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim" to create an inclusive workplace environment for trans staff.
She dismissed Ms Kelly's argument that it was unfair to sacrifice the privacy of women, 20% of the workforce, for the interests of five transgender staff members, 0.5 % of the workforce.'

Outrageous.

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/a-disappointing-judgment-in-defiance-of-the-supreme-court/

“I intend to appeal, and I will ask the EAT to consider expediting my appeal, as the decision risks further confounding the already widespread misunderstanding and defiance of the Supreme Court’s judgment in For Women Scotland.”

Well done, that woman. Gardening gloves at the ready.

Judge Sutherland:

“The claimant is aware that trans women believe their gender identity is at variance to their sex whereas non-trans men (including transvestites) do not.
“The claimant is aware that trans women often undergo a process for the purpose of reassigning their gender identity (or their belief in it) which may entail medical advice, hormonal treatment, and/or endeavouring to live permanently as a female including modifying their appearance and presentation. The claimant is aware that a transvestite i.e. crossdresser does not undergo such a process and is merely engaged in a temporary modification of their appearance.'

' trans women often undergo a process for the purpose of reassigning their gender identity (or their belief in it) which may entail medical advice, hormonal treatment, and/or endeavouring to live permanently as a female including modifying their appearance and presentation'

'a transvestite i.e. crossdresser does not undergo such a process'

How interesting. Sutherland seems to think that a 'temporary modification of appearance' doesn't count. Is this a new addition to the definition of 'trans'? It'll be good to see this differentiation really broken down in court.

I'm going to encourage DD not to do engineering. She's brilliant at Maths and Physics but what a shitty sexist environment she'd be working in. No thanks.

Why would you do that? Is there any reason to think the environment would be better in a non-engineering sector? If your DD has a aptitude for something, why not go for it? If the answer is, because of jerks, well, there's jerks everywhere.

This won't help your DD. Helping to fund these tribunal cases will.

Do we know how this is going?

https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/health-and-care-professions-council

I thought I’d subscribed to TT but obviously not.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0k9qqer7eo.amp

Councillor Mandy Clare - all charges dropped.

'A councillor who was accused of assaulting a security guard at a Pride event in Cheshire has had her case dropped.

Amanda Clare, a Reform UK councillor representing Winsford Dene on Cheshire West and Chester Council, was charged with assault and criminal damage in connection with an incident at the event in Winsford on 28 June.

Ms Clare, 54, of Malpas, appeared at Chester Magistrates' Court on 8 August where she pleaded not guilty to assaulting the security guard and damaging his camera.

Cheshire Police said the Crown Prosecution Service kept cases under constant review, and that "there was no longer sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction".'

Held up because John Naples-Campbell, head teacher, required a screen to shield himself from the woman he has accused of liking tweets.

I imagine "Trans r*chs are human r*chs” would get you a banhammer on MN, and plenty of places.

ETA: Formatting fail: I meant two asterisks at each location

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/magistrate-reprimanded-over-trans-video/5125391.article

Jane Taylor, magistrate, reprimanded for sharing tweets

'A magistrate who shared a video containing potentially transphobic commentary has been reprimanded for misconduct.

Jane Taylor, who sits on the south and west Devon bench, shared a YouTube video containing commentary which ‘could be considered’ transphobic in a parish council WhatsApp group.

A spokesperson for the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said: ‘When a member of the WhatsApp group expressed concern that the video contained language which could be perceived as transphobic or offensive, Mrs Taylor replied that the video was about single sex provision and did not concern transgender issues, and that she did not consider the video to be transphobic or use transphobic language.’

In her representations, Taylor said she shared the video as other councillors had requested it and the video was ‘about the protection of single-sex spaces, which she was campaigning for in her capacity as a councillor, and not about transgender issues’.'

I realised I hadnt poated this because its risible and I dont expect it to last five minutes. But for posterity:

https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/sandie-peggie-v-fife-health-board-and-another-judgment-and-summary/

Peggie v NHS Fife and Dr Upton

Partial win.

Appeal incoming.

Dr Anne Woodhouse (AW), before the Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service (HCPTS) Conduct and Competence Committee.

brought by drag queen head master John Naples Campbell.

'panel say there's no prospect that impairment can be found. This means AW that these proceedings end here for you. '

'HCPC state the posts contain gender critical content which is in contravention of their social media policy - and that these actions amount to misconduct, and thus AW’s fitness to practise is impaired as a result.
The allegations arise from one Complainant, an activist in LGBTQ politics.

The police were notified of the matter, but confirmed they would not be pursuing any investigation.
The HCPC have pursued a Fitness to Practice case against Dr Woodhouse since September 2022.'

archive.ph/MfCJP

Sylvester v University of Manchester

Uni of M found ro have discriminated against Ms Sylvester on the basis of her disability, after her dyspraxia made it harder to remember a colleague's new pronouns.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15455823/Disabled-university-worker-career-sabotaged-misgendered-trans-colleague-short-term-memory-problems-discriminated-against-judge-rules.html

I wonder how much damages she'll get? They retarded her academic progress significantly, as well as her work career. I hope she gets genuine satisfaction from this.

Louise Distras

Case dismissed

'On 9 December, I walked out of Leeds Crown Court NOT GUILTY.

'The case collapsed before it even got to trial. The CPS stood up, admitted they had zero evidence, and told the judge there wasn’t a cat in hell’s chance of any jury convicting me.

I’d been facing up to five years in prison for allegedly breaching an expired (and dodgy AF) non-molestation order. My “crime”? Speaking publicly about the abuse and stalking I’d suffered from a male trans activist at the Let Women Speak event in Leeds and in an X Spaces chat back in 2023.'

https://louisedistras.substack.com/p/i-walked-out-of-court-not-guilty