Gender reassignment and sex discrimination: tribunal decision on changing rooms

6th February 2026

Can a policy which allows trans women to use female changing rooms be discriminatory?

Yes, according to the Employment Tribunal in Hutchinson and others v County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust. 

Further to my recent article on For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers 2025, the management of single-sex facilities in the workplace continues to be a litigious area. 

As a brief recap, the Supreme Court in For Women Scotland Ltd found that a “woman”, for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, means a biological woman. The implication is that trans people with a gender recognition certificate will, in law, be treated according to their biological sex at birth.

The case in Hutchinson concerned eight female nurses employed by the NHS Trust who complained that another employee (a trans woman) was using the women’s changing facilities. This was in line with the Trust’s Transition in the Workplace policy (‘the policy’), which permitted transitioning employees to use whatever changing room corresponded to their self-declared identity. 

After the Trust refused to amend its policy following complaints from the Claimants, the Claimants issued claims in the Employment Tribunal for indirect discrimination and harassment. The Employment Tribunal had to interpret the Equality Act 2010 in light of the Supreme Court decision in Women Scotland. 

The Tribunal’s decision 
Employment Judge Sweeney (not linked to this firm) found that “by requiring the Claimants to share changing room with a biological male trans woman…the Respondent engaged in unwanted conduct related to sex and gender reassignment which had the effect of violating the dignity of the Claimants and creating…a hostile, humiliating and degrading environment.”

In other words, the Tribunal found that the Trust had harassed the Claimants by requiring them to share a changing room with a trans woman. Further, failing to address the Claimants’ concerns about the policy and asking the Claimants to ‘broaden their mindset’ also amounted to harassment. 

With regards to the indirect discrimination claim, the Tribunal found that, although the Trust’s policy applied to both men and women, women were placed at a particular disadvantage because they were more likely to feel distressed or fearful when required to share changing rooms. As the Trust had failed to justify the policy, this claim also succeeded. 

What this means for employers 
Although this case has attracted a lot of media attention, it is non-binding and there could be an appeal by the Trust.

Nonetheless, it reminds employers that their policies must be clearly drafted so that they are compliant with the Equality Act framework. Employers must undertake a proportionality assessment before deciding to grant access to single-sex facilities and, where possible, provide suitable alternative arrangements, and consult with both the transitioning employee and other affected colleagues when dealing with staff concerns seriously. 

If you need assistance with your policies or dealing with complaints of a similar nature, we’re here to help. Please get in touch with us at Employment@SchofieldSweeney.co.uk.

We’re here for you – contact us today

0300 124 0406
enquiries@schofieldsweeney.co.uk

Contact Us

Bradford office

Church Bank House
Bradford
West Yorkshire
BD1 4DY

What3words - names.frosted.broke
Phone: 01274 350 800 Fax: 01274 306 111

Leeds office

Centura
76 Wellington Street
Leeds
West Yorkshire
LS1 2AY

What3words - crass.makes.store
Phone: 0113 849 4000 Fax: 0113 243 9326

Huddersfield office

30 Market Street
Huddersfield
West Yorkshire
HD1 2HG

What3words - eaten.salads.case
Phone: 01484 915 000 Fax: 0800 368 8449

London office

33 Bedford Row
London
WC1R 4JH
Phone: 020 8146 5119
Copyright © Schofield Sweeney Solicitors. All Rights Reserved.

Schofield Sweeney LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Website by Tall
Conveyancing Quality