The debate about access to gendered facilities has remained a live legal and political issue since a key ruling in April 2026 that interpreted the Equality Act 2010 to refer to biological sex. Ministers and regulators have been under pressure to provide usable guidance for employers and service providers. Recently, Bridget Phillipson, the minister with responsibility for women and equalities, told officials that an updated code of practice from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is intended for services and associations, and does not change workplace regulations. That comment adds a further layer to an already complex legal picture, and many organisations are still seeking clear operational rules.
Employers have awaited practical direction for months. The EHRC carried out a review launched in 2026 and completed it by August 2026, recommending that some gendered facilities be allocated on the basis of biological sex. In February 2026 the regulator said it would take no further action in relation to those recommendations. Meanwhile, courts have been asked to interpret how that advice interacts with existing obligations under the Equality Act 2010, producing a mix of rulings that organisations must now reconcile with internal policies.
Recent court rulings and legal context
The judicial trajectory has been decisive on some points and ambiguous on others. The Supreme Court’s decision in April 2026 clarified that in the context of the law at issue, the term woman referred to biological sex, a conclusion that prompted interim guidance from the EHRC. On 13 February, a High Court judgment examined the regulator’s guidance and related challenges. The court determined that service providers do not have to exclude trans people from using facilities consistent with their identity, even as it addressed separate questions about the application of single-sex provisions in workplace settings. The result is a nuanced legal map that separates obligations for public services from certain workplace arrangements.
Ministerial statement and case meeting
Bridget Phillipson discussed the matter in a meeting with an NHS nurse, who had reached a settlement after an incident linked to the treatment of a trans patient. Phillipson said the revised code of practice from the EHRC has not been postponed and, crucially, that it is aimed at services and associations rather than the statutory framework that governs workplace relations. Her remark was intended to reassure employers that existing workplace regulations remain the primary reference for internal employment policies, while the forthcoming code will guide providers of services more directly.
Civil society and legal challengers
Responses from advocacy groups
National advocacy organisations have reacted to the unfolding mix of judicial, regulatory and ministerial signals. Stonewall welcomed the process of ensuring the code of practice is legally accurate and useful, urging that it should help organisations treat people with dignity while balancing competing rights under the Equality Act 2010. Stonewall emphasized the need for clarity so that employers, charities and public bodies can have confidence about their legal obligations and protect LGBTQ+ people effectively under the law.
Legal challenges and the Good Law Project
The guidance and its legal status have been the subject of litigation. A challenge brought by the Good Law Project against the EHRC was heard in the High Court, with the judgment on 13 February dismissing the grounds of the claim in that instance. The court evaluated standing and legal arguments and rejected the challenge, while noting limits on when third parties may bring judicial review. The challengers have signalled their intention to appeal and continue fundraising to cover legal costs, so further court hearings are possible as the dispute proceeds through the system.
What this means for employers and next steps
For businesses, public bodies and charities the immediate implication is to treat existing workplace regulations and employment law as the baseline while watching for the code of practice once it is laid before Parliament. Organisations should review current policies on single-sex spaces and training on respectful treatment, taking legal advice where necessary. The combination of ministerial clarification, court judgments and ongoing advocacy means that employers must stay alert: operational guidance may follow once the EHRC places the updated code before Parliament, and further litigation could refine how both services and workplaces should act.
In the meantime, stakeholders across government, the legal sector and civil society will continue engaging over the content and placement of the code of practice, while affected individuals and organisations weigh the practical consequences for facilities, privacy and dignity at work and in public services.