But what does the EHRC guidance actually mean in practice? Our Head of Employment, Daniel Wilde, explains.
The Background…
In April 2025, the UK Supreme Court ruled in the case of For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers Supreme Court Judgment that, for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, references to “sex” mean biological sex. The court held that this interpretation applies even where a person has a Gender Recognition Certificate.
Following that judgment, the EHRC published interim guidance and later developed an updated Code of Practice explaining how organisations should apply the ruling.
The EHRC stresses that it is interpreting the law rather than creating new law. Trans people remain protected under the Equality Act through the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.
What changes for toilets, changing rooms and similar spaces?
This is the area that has attracted most attention.
The EHRC’s position is that where facilities are genuinely single-sex, access should be based on biological sex rather than gender identity. In practical terms, the guidance says that trans women should generally not use women’s facilities and trans men should generally not use men’s facilities.
At the same time, the guidance says trans people should not be left with no facilities at all, and recommends mixed-sex or gender-neutral provision where possible.
This is where much of the controversy arises.
Why is the Trans Community worried?
Many trans people and LGBT organisations argue that the guidance creates a practical problem rather than solving one.
A trans woman who has lived as a woman for years may feel unsafe, conspicuous or vulnerable using men’s facilities. A trans man may face similar issues in women’s facilities. Critics argue that the guidance effectively places some trans people in a situation where neither option feels workable.
Others point out that many public buildings do not have separate gender-neutral facilities available, meaning the proposed alternative often does not exist in practice.
For many trans people, the concern is therefore not only about legal rights but about the practical realities of navigating public life.
What about workplaces?
The guidance has particular implications for employers.
Employers are already required to provide sufficient toilet and washing facilities under workplace regulations. The EHRC says those facilities should be organised according to biological sex where they are designated as single-sex. It also encourages employers to provide additional mixed-sex facilities where possible.
This means many organisations are reviewing policies that previously allowed staff to use facilities based on gender identity.
Does this remove all protections for trans people?
No.
One of the most common misunderstandings is that the Supreme Court ruling or the EHRC guidance removed all legal protections for trans people.
They did not.
Trans people remain protected from discrimination, harassment and victimisation under the Equality Act’s gender reassignment provisions. Employers, service providers and public bodies still have legal obligations towards trans people.
The dispute is largely about how those protections should be balanced against provisions for single-sex services and spaces.
Why is the debate so polarised?
Supporters of the guidance argue that it provides legal clarity after years of uncertainty. They say women-only spaces were created for reasons of privacy, dignity and safety, and that the Supreme Court ruling simply clarified how existing law should be interpreted.
Critics argue that the guidance goes beyond legal clarification and risks making everyday life more difficult for trans people. They fear increased exclusion from public spaces and greater uncertainty about where trans people are expected to go.
Both sides often describe the issue as one of rights and protections, but they disagree fundamentally on whose rights are being affected and how those rights should be balanced.
What happens next?
The legal position is still evolving.
The EHRC’s Code of Practice is intended to give organisations clearer guidance on applying the law following the Supreme Court judgment. Government ministers, public bodies, employers and campaign groups continue to debate how the guidance should work in practice.
What is already clear is that the argument is no longer primarily about definitions. It is about how those definitions translate into everyday life: where people can go, how public services operate, and whether trans people can move through society with the same sense of safety and dignity that everyone expects.
How can we help?
If you are an employer who needs advice surrounding the guidance, our specialist Employment team can help.
Likewise, if you have suffered discrimination at work, we can advise you on the steps to take.
Please contact us today to discuss your circumstances.
