Single-Sex Spaces And Developing Case Law

The legal landscape for sex, gender reassignment and single sex spaces is evolving and complex. The Supreme Court clarification and emerging case law require careful navigation. This update summarises the current position and key considerations for employers/organisations pending further statutory guidance. 

In April 2025, the UK Supreme Court delivered its judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers, clarifying that under the Equality Act 2010: 

The terms “sex”, “woman” and “man” refer to biological sex, not gender identity as acquired or recognised through a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). 

The clarification has significant implications for how some organisations provide and manage single-sex services and spaces (e.g. toilets, changing facilities and other sex-separated services). The judgment did not remove, or in any way dilute, legal protection for individuals under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.  

The EHRC plays the key role in providing guidance for organisations around the Equality Act to ensure the law is followed, however the lack of updated statutory guidance does not remove any overarching legal obligations that organisations have, either under the Equality Act or Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992. 

EHRC Interim Guidance: What has happened? 

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) published an Interim Update in April 2025 soon after the Supreme Court ruling. That Interim Update attempted to set out how the decision might affect employers and service providers, including practical arrangements around single-sex spaces. 

In October 2025, the EHRC withdrew the Interim Update from its website, and the legality of that Update was also challenged in court. The High Court recently ruled that the Interim Update, whilst it was available, was an accurate statement of the law. 

The EHRC’s current information explicitly tells duty-bearers that specialist legal advice should be sought to understand obligations under the Equality Act and other legislation. 

Duty bearers should:  

• continue to take specialist legal advice, as before, on their obligations under any relevant legislation, including the Equality Act 2010 and Human Rights Act 1998 

• use the new code when it is approved by Parliament. 

Source: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/our-work/uk-supreme-court-ruling-meaning-sex-equality-act-our-work 

The EHRC has been working on an updated Code of Practice. This is for services, public functions and associations and reflects the Supreme Court decision. A draft was submitted to the Equalities Minister in early September 2025 and is awaiting approval from government and laying before Parliament for scrutiny.  

This is separate to the EHRC’s Employment Statutory Code of Practice which will also need updating to provide guidance to all employers. There is no set timeline for this.  

The CIPD has been in regular contact with - and will continue to engage with -the EHRC and relevant stakeholders to highlight where practical workplace specific clarity is required.  

We will provide further updates as statutory guidance progresses through parliament. Until such time, employers should continue to follow the law and the steer of the EHRC, taking specific legal advice where they have concerns about application within their context. The CIPD’s guidance for organisations is to follow the EHRC’s most up to date information and to ensure policies are reflective of this, rather than any previous guidance. 

High-Profile Tribunal Decisions 

In addition to the Supreme Court judgement and High Court developments, several employment tribunal decisions have addressed disputes arising from workplace arrangements concerning changing facilities and competing rights under the Equality Act. These cases are fact and context specific, meaning their broader application is unclear and do not create a binding precedent.  

However, they demonstrate that tribunals are considering: 

• Whether employers have appropriately balanced protections relating to sex and gender reassignment  

• Whether policies have been applied proportionately including quality and timelines of grievance handling  

• Whether employees have been subjected to a hostile or degrading environment as a result of employer decision making. 

In some cases, the facts that have given rise to the claims in these other cases pre-date the For Women Scotland Ltd decision. 

It is possible that some of the outcomes in these cases, which are seen as dependent on interpretations of the implications of the Supreme Court clarification, will be appealed and the CIPD will continue to provide updates on high profile cases through our magazine, People Management, online.  

The evolving case law and ongoing development of statutory guidance reinforce the importance of careful evidence-based decision making by employers on a case-by-case basis. Organisations should ensure compliance with current legal obligations, seek specialist advice where appropriate and monitor developments closely. The CIPD will continue to provide updates and practical insight to support members navigate this complex and sensitive area employment law.