ET Ruling on Changing Room Access, Sex, and Gender Reassignment
ET finds indirect sex discrimination where trans woman used female changing rooms, highlighting employer obligations and staff rights.
Read More
The ET dismissed claims from a non-binary employee over misgendering and record errors, ruling on harassment and protections under the Equality Act.
29 January 2026
Case Study
In this case a non binary member of staff (“Lockwood”) claimed that they had been subject to discrimination following their decision to transition.
They had been born female and became non binary, reflecting this change in adopting a non gender specific first name and use of neutral pronouns. The employer (“the Trust”) supported them by updating it’s records and adhering to their wishes.
However, some records (such as the original contract of employment signed when they had been female) and some aspects of the IT system still referred to their previous gender/name. There were also incidents over contact with the IT helpdesk and the misgendering of them by an internal vaccination clinic. Lockwood brought claims before the Employment who dismissed the claims on two grounds, as explained below.
Case Study
In terms of alleged harassment the ET found that ‘violating’ someone’s dignity is more serious or significant than offending or hurting them.
In considering whether these incidents had the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for Lockwood, it concluded it didn’t because many staff were unfamiliar with they/them pronouns and on each occasion where Lockwood complained, they received an apology and managers put in place positive steps to change things. By contrast, the ET found that Lockwood was unwilling to accept the apologies they had been given, adopted an inflexible stance and was unforgiving when mistakes occurred. The ET found that the employee therefore contributed to the environment they complained about.
The Claimant had therefore not established that they had been subject to harassment.
In a significant finding, the ET in this case found that gender fluidity was not protected by the Equality Act. This is at odds with the established case of Taylor v Jaguar Land Rover which held that gender reassignment is a “journey” and that non binary and gender fluid individuals were protected. However, in this case, Lockwood was found not to have that protection as they were not moving from one sex to another, but instead moving away from their birth sex.
In their decision, the ET focussed on the precise wording in the Equality Act- reassignment as a move from one thing to another- and found that interpretation to align with the Supreme Court’s decision in For Women Scotland that the Equality Act’s reference to sex means ‘biological sex’, which is binary – either a woman or a man. This could have significant implications for the protection (or lack thereof) for non binary and gender fluid individuals.
Contact Us
If you’re reviewing workplace policies for non-binary or gender-diverse staff, or need guidance on managing sensitive employee matters, complete the form below or call 0330 123 9501 to speak with our Employment Law and HR team.
Knowledge
ET finds indirect sex discrimination where trans woman used female changing rooms, highlighting employer obligations and staff rights.
Read MoreET dismisses claims over trans women using female toilets, clarifying employer duties and best practice for workplace facilities.
Read MoreEmployment Tribunal examines gender critical beliefs, trans rights, and single-sex spaces in landmark Peggie v Fife Health Board case.
Read MoreDownload our Employment Rights Act Resource Pack to navigate key 2025–2027 employment law changes with expert guidance and practical tools.
Read moreEmployee falls asleep at work and is unfairly dismissed; explore lessons for employers on investigations, mitigation, and proportionality.
Read MoreHow employers can handle whistleblowing effectively to reduce risk and prevent escalation, drawing lessons from the Argence-Lafon case.
Read MoreExplore lessons from the Ritchie V Goom Electrical Ltd case on managing conflicting workstyles and age diversity in modern offices.
Read MoreA clear roadmap from our Employment & HR Law team on upcoming Employment Rights Bill changes employers need to prepare for.
Read moreNorman v Lidl: Redundancy scoring based on degree requirement found to be indirect age discrimination, costing the employer over £50,000.
Read MoreA Tribunal ruling may end the two-year limit on backdated holiday pay claims, creating major risks for employers.
Read MoreKennedy v Hendy Group highlights the importance of supporting employees in redundancy and exploring alternative roles fairly.
Read MoreTeacher unfairly dismissed due to trade union activity and disability. The Tribunal awarded £370K in this landmark case.
Read MoreScroll to next section
Scroll back to the top
On Monday 29 September, Flint Bishop successfully completed the acquisition of the entire business of Lupton Fawcett LLP. You have been forwarded to the page most relevant to your visit.
Please feel free to explore our website and learn more about our legal services and professionals, including those who have recently joined us from Lupton Fawcett.