BAGIS: Supreme Court Ruling on Single Sex Spaces FAQs
9th November 2025
Further information for members and their organisations following the UK Supreme Court ruling, April 2025
We understand that many gender diverse people and their allies are distressed, and struggling with their wellbeing, after the recent ruling by the UK Supreme Court and subsequent update by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on 25th April 2025.
We want to reassure you that the BAGIS is committed to supporting gender diverse people and acting as LGBTQIA+ allies.
You can read our full Statement in response here.
Many healthcare organisations will also be finding it difficult to understand how to interpret the ruling and continue to ensure equitable access to all of their service users.
We have provided answers to some frequently asked questions below to aid our members and their respective organisations. Support for gender diverse people can be found on the TransActual Website
Frequently Asked Questions
What does the Supreme Court ruling mean?
The Supreme Court has ruled how ‘sex’ should be interpreted in the Equality Act (EA) 2010. No legislation has changed. The ruling states that where the EA refers to sex, this is considered to a person’s sex registered at birth (defined as “biological” sex in the ruling) regardless of their gender identity or possession of a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).
The ruling states:
“It is not the role of the court to adjudicate on the arguments in the public domain
on the meaning of gender or sex, nor is it to define the meaning of the word “woman”
other than when it is used in the provisions of the EA 2010. It has a more limited role
which does not involve making policy. The principal question which the court addresses
on this appeal is the meaning of the words which Parliament has used in the EA 2010 in
legislating to protect women and members of the trans community against discrimination.”
The ruling did not make a legal judgement on the definition of a woman or more widely on the definition of sex or gender, other than for the purposes of the EA.
In delivering the ruling of the Supreme Court, Lord Hodge was counselled “against reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another.”
Trans and non-binary people are still protected against discrimination in the Equality Act on the grounds of the protected characteristic of gender reassignment , including people’s right to define their own gender identities. The EHRC update published April 2025 is not statutory guidance. Such guidance has recently been put out for public consultation.
What does this mean for inclusive spaces?
Employers and service providers are still required to provide spaces for transgender people.
The judgment does not prevent a service provider from offering an inclusive service or space to people who live as women (or men) or on another similar inclusive basis. If trans inclusive service providers wish to say they provide a service for a particular gender, they can do. However, they should be clear about what that means for those accessing it
The Equality Act 2010 has always provided guidance on how “single-sex” services might be justified:
“Single sex services are permitted where:
- only people of that sex require it;
- there is joint provision for both sexes but that is not sufficient on its own;
- if the service were provided for men and women jointly, it would not be as effective and it is not reasonably practicable to provide separate services for each sex;
- they are provided in a hospital or other place where users need special attention (or in parts of such an establishment);
- they may be used by more than one person and a woman might object to the presence of a man (or vice versa); or
- they may involve physical contact between a user and someone else and that other person may reasonably object if the user is of the opposite sex.
In each case, the separate provision has to be objectively justified.”
Service providers can still choose to provide inclusive services or spaces, especially to improve or encourage access for disadvantaged groups
Section 158 of the Equality Act (2010) lays out that the Act does not prohibit people from encouraging participation in an activity of, minimizing disadvantage to, or meeting the needs of, those who share a protected characteristic, but have different needs, or where their participation in an activity is low.
Therefore, service providers who take positive action to include trans people in a service that might be normally considered to segregate according to sex registered at birth could be considered to be acting with proportionate means of reducing a disadvantage to trans people, or overcoming low participation by trans people in an activity or space. It’s recommended that service providers document their decision-making processes and discussions when balancing the needs of different groups of service users.
What is the legal position on using ‘single sex’ spaces like toilets?
The Equality Act (2010) and Gender Recognition Act (2004) do not give specific rulings on which facilities any individual can use. Anyone can use an individual toilet that stands on its own and has its own door to the rest of the premises.
The EHRC position on “mixed-sex” facilities have been clarified following challenge by the Good Law Project:
“In relation to workplaces, requirements are set out in the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992. These require suitable and sufficient facilities to be provided including toilets and sometimes changing facilities and showers. Toilets, showers and changing facilities may be mixed-sex where they are in a separate room lockable from the inside.”
In some circumstances it might be lawful for service providers to segregate toilets based upon sex recorded at birth. Where this policy of segregation is explicitly stated, it may be unlawful to disregard the policy.
However, it may also be unlawful to segregate toilet usage based on sex assigned at birth the approach to this is somewhat in the hands of employers. Where no indication is being made which policy is being used to define toilet provision, it would reasonable to use the toilet corresponding with your gender identity. If there are no appropriate toilets or facilities for people this could be raised as unlawful based on the Equality Act. This level of personal advocacy should not be expected of individual people, not least because of the potential risk of harm that it may place them under.
For organisations wishing to be inclusive, the following wording has been suggested (see White, 2025, below):
It is our policy that female toilets are available for trans women and male toilets are available for trans men.
Anyone requiring or desiring additional privacy may use the accessible toilet (*located…) or the gender neutral toilet (*located…).
Anyone not clear on this policy or who perceives it causes them a difficulty, please refer to (*who).
(*Complete as relevant to the location)
What does this mean for NHS inpatient facilities?
Updated NHS guidance on Same-Sex Accommodation is currently under review and will need to be updated in line with the Supreme Court ruling.
The NHS Constitution states a commitment that NHS patients will “not have to share sleeping accommodation with patients of the opposite sex, except where appropriate”.
In considering where this might be appropriate, NHS organisations will need to take into account several factors including:
- Patient dignity and privacy
- Clinical needs
- Estates and room availability
Further Resources
We are grateful for the work of The Good Law Project in clarifying this ruling. There is a more detailed description of the legal aspects of this ruling at The Good Law Project here
TransActual have also produced a resource for the public here.
Stonewall have produced a Briefing for Employers which can be found here.
OUTpatients charity have produced a response to the Supreme Court ruling and EHRC statement here.
Translucent offer further discussion and critique of the wider legal context of the Supreme Court Ruling can be found here.