Update from Maya
We have some exciting news to share: Sex Matters is appealing against the decision on the Hampstead Ponds. We were refused permission to take a judicial review by the High Court in January, which meant we didn’t get as far as being able to make the substantive arguments about how the City of London’s “trans inclusive” policy discriminates against women.
But this is an important strategic case, and we don’t give up that easily! We have now filed a 25-page “skeleton argument” for permission to appeal the procedural grounds on which we were turned down.
The court said we did not have standing to take the case because we are a charity, not an individual, and that an individual woman facing discrimination and harassment at the Ponds should instead take a case to county court.
We say this is wrong in law – there have been plenty of similar cases where charities have been found to have standing. The correct legal test is not whether the claimant is the “most appropriate person” to take a case, but whether they have “sufficient interest”.
The Good Law Project got turned down on standing in its recent attempt to take a judicial review against the EHRC for not having “sufficient interest”. But the High Court turned us down without even applying this test.
We think it is particularly important that cases like ours against the City of London Corporation can be tried as judicial reviews, rather than leaving the entire burden of fighting unlawful policies to individual women who must take on the cost and risk bringing discrimination claims. We are arguing that it is unlawful direct discrimination (unless the separate-sex service exceptions are used) to exclude men from the women’s pond and women from the men’s.
The High Court also said that our case against the Corporation of London was out of time and also premature. You can see Edward Lord chuckling about that news here. He was the original architect of the City of London Corporation’s gender-identity policy.
We say this conclusion is wrong, because the corporation did in fact make a new decision in July 2025 following the Supreme Court judgment in the case of For Women Scotland. It scrapped a policy that included “non-binary and gender fluid” individuals and put up new signs at the Ladies’ Pond saying that it welcomes “biological women and trans women with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment under the Equality Act 2010”.
The Ladies’ Pond is an iconic battleground for campaigners for women’s sex-based rights. This is a strategic case to demonstrate that service providers must follow the law.
Thank you to everyone who has supported the case to get this far. We will keep you updated!
Maya Forstater
EHRC vindicated in High Court
Why Good Law Project’s legal challenge failed
In this week’s episode of the Sex Matters podcast, Maya Forstater and Fiona McAnena discuss the failed legal challenge of the Good Law Project (GLP) against the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), and the misinformation spread by GLP, other trans lobby groups and even some politicians.
On 13th February the High Court dismissed a legal challenge from the GLP and three anonymous claimants against the EHRC’s interim guidance on single-sex services published shortly after the For Women Scotland judgment last year. Sex Matters intervened in support of the EHRC. Mr Justice Swift ruled that the EHRC’s interim update was an accurate statement of the law on single-sex spaces, and ruled that “transsexual persons” under the Equality Act have no right to use opposite-sex toilets or changing rooms.
Read our analysis of GLP v EHRC.
If you’d like to watch our podcast earlier on a Friday, or get our updates in your inbox, subscribe to our Substack. You can opt in or out for podcasts and news (website updates).
Lobby MPs to stop the puberty-blockers trial
If you are concerned about the planned puberty-blocker trial, join us in Westminster on Tuesday 10th March to tell your MP that children deserve better.
Together with the Women’s Rights Network (WRN) and LGB Alliance we are planning a lobby day at Parliament to support people to talk to their MPs, and to encourage them to understand the concerns about the trial.
WRN is managing registration for the day and will send you everything you need, starting with an email to your MP asking to meet on the 10th.
Why are employers waiting for the wrong guidance?
Bridget Phillipson, the minister for women and equalities, has said that the government has been clear that employers should not wait for the EHRC code of practice for service providers to be finalised. We say that neither service providers nor employers should wait: the law is the law.
Send the puberty-blocker trial back to the research ethics committee, Wes!
We have written again to Wes Streeting, the health secretary, following the latest legal developments and asked him to send the puberty-blocker trial back to the research ethics committee to reconsider the legal context for children and schools.
In the news
Alison Holt and James Melley for BBC News quoted Maya in coverage of the GLP v EHRC High Court decision as urging the government to issue the final EHRC guidance without delay. Fiona discussed the case with Josh Howie on GB News’ Free Speech Nation.
The Telegraph reported Dr Hilary Cass’s comments that social media influences children to identify as transgender following publication of the government’s schools guidance last week. The article referred to Sex Matters’ criticisms of the guidance for not ruling out social transition in school.
Fiona had two interviews on BBC Ulster radio with Stephen Nolan and William Crawley to discuss the news that Northern Ireland’s health secretary has suspended participation in the UK-wide puberty-blocker trial, pending an ongoing judicial review.
Daniel Sanderson for The Times revealed that NHS Fife said that smear tests are for “anyone with a cervix” in a recent public-health information update, while at the same time being clear that prostate cancer checks are only for men. Fiona said that this messaging demonstrated the deep-rooted sexism underlying gender ideology.
Gabriella Swerling for The Telegraph reported Maya’s congratulations on X to Christian social worker Felix Ngole, who won his appeal over comments about marriage and sexuality. Maya said that it was not reasonable to remove religious people from employment because some people find their views upsetting.
Mary Wright for the Scottish Sun (print only) reported that the Scottish Government’s “trans inclusivity drive” is promoting pronoun use among civil servants. Helen pointed out the contradiction with the requirement for civil servants to be impartial.
If you’d like this memo in your inbox every Friday at teatime, join our mailing list now.
Why do normal people have to fight to get the useless leaders to listen to us? We only want logic and common sense to dictate how we live, not some fantasy delusion. Khan is a xxxx and the govt is xxxx.