Hampstead Heath Ladies' Pond faces legal action

[IwantToRetire]

Hampstead Heath Ladies’ Pond is facing legal action for allegedly failing to ban transgender women despite the landmark Supreme Court gender ruling.

The famed women-only bathing spot has maintained its trans-inclusive policy pending a ‘review’ in spite of the UK’s highest court ruling in April that trans women are not legally female.

Women’s rights campaigners sent a legal letter to the City of London Corporation, which manages the ponds, last week warning they intend to bring a legal challenge unless the policy is revoked with 'immediate effect’.

The legal letter, seen by the Mail, says that the current policy ‘violates the dignity of women using the Ladies’ Pond’ and that the Corporation is ‘operating it unlawfully by allowing trans identifying males to access it’.

From https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14851251/Hampstead-Heath-Ladies-Pond-legal-action-ban-trans-women-Supreme-Court.html

Different version of same story https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/06/26/hampstead-ladies-pond-swimmers-accuse-trans-women-spying/ and at https://archive.is/fZ31q

Of course not. The men were very unhappy about women claiming to be men attempting to use the male only pond.

Bring it on indeed. I hope the Corporation gets its arse handed to it.
This is probably a very stupid question, but: why does it actually need a court case? Isn’t it just straight up illegal what the ponds/Corporation are doing?

I've very happily planted a few seeds for the SM gardening appeal.

The City won't walk back until they're made to - they think they've found a loophole. It needs to be closed so might as well be this case as any.

Me too. This case may seem relatively trivial, but due to the long and controversial history of the ponds and Lord and his “consultation”, it’s very important.

I like the way SM say they want this to be a clear example so that other cases don’t have to go to court but I assume that the problem with civil law is that there are far too many people out there who really will not stop unless you sue them. Fingers crossed the EHRC also use all of their powers.

Yes. Edward Lord also had to be removed from an Employment Tribunal panel due to his huge bias in this. As I understand he was called up and asked if he wanted to participate and he was very keen to agree. He failed to mention that his strong anti women’s rights views made him utterly partial and was removed.

It was the Kristie Higgs tribunal and he was invited as a lay member. He apparently unidentified as ‘non binary’ and ‘queer’.

They did mention Man Friday with the part about women donning fake moustaches and getting thrown out of the men’s ponds. Those brave amazing women were the first introduction to this madness for me. I salute their flowery swimming hats and fake moustaches and thank goodness for every woman (and the odd man - Glinner et al) who have put their heads above the parapet for our sex based rights.

It has occurred to me to wonder about the setting up of the ponds when they started. Are there minutes of the meetings involved? And could the City be able to show that the criteria for setting up the ladies pool has now changed and become irrelevant? I suspect not. I suspect the original criteria were to give women a safe place to swim without the intrusion of men and that has not changed. So any argument they use about the science now showing that some men have indeed changed male behaviour would be spurious. Women's descriptions of their behaviour is of males, bikini-clad or not, and thus renders an original intention of a place where women can be freed from such behaviour still relevant.

Very good point!

So any argument they use about the science now showing that some men have indeed changed male behaviour would be spurious.

Indeed. In fact, quite the opposite: since "trans people have always existed", must have existed at the time the ponds were designated by sex, at which time it was clear they were not included by self-identification.

@Treaclewell the thing is they probably did not change the constitution of the pools. What changed was the definition of what is a woman. So in their distorted thinking, it is anyone who says they are.

I believe they will cave, but or unless RMW et Al are involved.

i think what we are seeing now is the shock wave of the SC judgement. Niche lawyers such as twat face in the Peggy case, and other nitwits who see an income stream with endless possibilities, ride the trans horse until it has no steam left and dies in a very heartbreaking Winney.

Yes, he was the second TRA judge in that tribunal who had had to recuse himself. I think in the end they were missing one lay member.

and isn’t he in a relationship with the non binary female who wrote a lot of the BACP framework for gender, which was full of appalling generalisations and stereotypes about women?

twat face in the Peggy case made me snort

Yes, MegjohnBarker. She seems to feel she needs to identify as non-binary to justify wearing a flat cap.

Lord meanwhile seems to identify as a superhero.

Is he wearing that bag as some sort of posing pouch? Or perhaps he can't see it as it's in the lee of his belly.

40 years ago I had short hair and wore a flat cap, and sometimes my dad's old jacket. I don't know what I was thinking, but it certainly wasn't that I was non-binary.

Wasn't it MegJohnBarker who claimed there's no difference between a clitoris and a penis apart from size?

These people should not be allowed out on their own.

Decision date for trans swimmers at Hampstead Heath ponds
https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/25639389.decision-date-trans-swimmers-hampstead-heath-ponds/

This is absurd. Weeks to analyse “thousands” of responses and then they’re going to hold focus groups too and try to defend their position as Sex Matters seeks a judicial review. Trying to avoid implementing the law must be costing a fortune and yet at the same time they don’t have money to maintain the historic features of the Heath:

https://www.camdennewjournal.co.uk/article/crumbling-pergola-on-hampstead-heath-put-on-at-risk-register

At what point is this waste of money malfeasance in a public office?

This is very important. I have not been to swim there because I am nervous to go on my own not knowing who I will encounter. I’d love to go to a female only pond and swim in the summer. I am not going to whilst it’s mixed sex.