Trans doctor changing room case: does it amount to a bathroom ban?

"The Peggie ruling concluded that the supreme court judgment did not make it inherently unlawful for a trans female, who is biologically male under the Equalities Act, to be given permission to use a female changing room at work. And a week earlier, another employment tribunal reached a similar conclusion, ruling in favour of the trans-inclusive toilets policy at aerospace firm Leonardo UK's office in Edinburgh."

"Equalities law experts are quick to point out that both these rulings are first-instance cases, so they do not set a binding precedent. Maria Kelly, who brought the Leonardo action, is appealing and on Thursday Peggie will set out her next steps at a press conference. As is typical of this highly contested territory, immediate reactions diverge sharply: Sex Matters, the gender-critical campaign group that assisted Peggie at the start of her case, condemned the rulings as fundamentally misunderstanding the law."

A Dundee employment tribunal gave Sandie Peggie a narrow win over sharing a changing room with a transgender doctor. The case addressed whether a supreme court ruling that defined woman by biological sex requires excluding transgender people from same-sex facilities. Interim Equality and Human Rights Commission advice effectively barred trans people from using facilities matching their lived gender. The tribunal found the supreme court decision did not inherently make it unlawful for a trans female, biologically male under the Equalities Act, to be permitted to use a female workplace changing room. A separate tribunal recently upheld a trans-inclusive toilet policy. Both rulings are first-instance and non-binding; appeals and sharp public reactions continue.

Read at www.theguardian.com