Ms A Palmer, Counsel For v Respondent — 2019

The tribunal heard a preliminary issue on whether the claimant's gender-critical views, and the corresponding lack of belief that trans women are women and trans men are men, were protected philosophical beliefs under section 10 of the Equality Act 2010. It found that the core of the claimant's belief was that sex is biologically immutable, that there are only two sexes, and that a trans woman is not in reality a woman and a trans man is not in reality a man.

The tribunal accepted that the belief was genuinely held and that it concerned a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour. It also held that the belief met the minimum threshold of cogency and cohesion, although it noted that there was significant scientific evidence against the claimant's position and that the law still generally treats sex as binary for many purposes.

The tribunal nevertheless concluded that the claimant's belief, in its absolutist form, was incompatible with the human dignity and fundamental rights of others and was therefore not worthy of respect in a democratic society. It relied in particular on the treatment of trans people in Goodwin and on the Gender Recognition Act 2004, holding that a person with a Gender Recognition Certificate is legally the sex acquired under that Act and that the claimant was not entitled to ignore that status.

The tribunal also held that the corresponding lack of belief was not protected. It found that believing trans women are women did not create the same incompatibility with rights, but that the claimant's lack of that belief failed the Grainger criteria. The judgment did not determine the separate preliminary issues on employment status or whether section 39 of the Equality Act 2010 was engaged, because there was insufficient time.