Search

How can we help?

Icon

A step in the right direction for gender fluidity in landmark discrimination case

Non-binary engineer, Rose Taylor had been subjected to bullying and harassment at the hands of work colleagues and faced a lack of support from management at Jaguar Land Rover. The poor treatment had started in 2017 when Taylor first identified as gender fluid/nonbinary and started changing the way she presented herself, including wearing women’s clothing. Taylor brought claims in the Employment Tribunal for harassment, direct discrimination and victimisation on the grounds of gender re-assignment. Gender re-assignment is one of the nine protected characteristics set out in the Equality Act 2010. However, it was uncertain, up until this point, whether the gender re-assignment definition would cover individuals who identified as non-binary or gender fluid.

The tribunal held however that it was “beyond any doubt” that Taylor should be protected under the gender re-assignment characteristic. Taylor’s claims for harassment, direct discrimination and victimisation were all successful on this basis. In reaching a decision, the Tribunal judge commented that it was clear that “gender is a spectrum” and that gender reassignment “concerns a personal journey and moving a gender identity away from birth sex”.

The tribunal held however that it was “beyond any doubt” that Taylor should be protected under the gender re-assignment characteristic.

The importance of this judgement is that it increases the chances of other individuals with complex gender identities falling within the definition of (and therefore under the protection of ) the gender re-assignment definition in the Equality Act 2010.

At Clarkslegal we have extensive experience of discrimination cases and would be happy to discuss any queries you may have.

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 07 August 2026
  • Employment

ACAS Draft New Code on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures

ACAS have published a draft Code on 30 July 2026, which will replace the 2015 ACAS Code on disciplinary and grievance procedures when the Code is finalised at the end of September 2026.

art
  • 06 August 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

The rise of the AI-powered individual: Is your business ready?

Artificial intelligence is changing the data protection landscape, but perhaps not in the way many organisations expected. Much of the discussion has centred on businesses adopting AI and ensuring they comply with the UK GDPR.

Pub
  • 06 August 2026
  • Employment

Employment law changes in 2026: What you need to know

With ongoing changes to UK employment law, staying updated is more challenging than ever. Join Monica Atwal and Harry Berryman for a live webinar covering 2026 HR changes and key employment law updates on Thursday 17 September.

Pub
  • 04 August 2026
  • Employment

From Opportunity to Employment: Building Inclusive Workplaces Together | Hosted by Breakthrough Supported Employment

Join Breakthrough Supported Employment for a live seminar on building inclusive workplaces at Malmaison Reading. Clarkslegal’s Lucy White will speak alongside industry experts, sharing insights on fostering diversity and creating equitable opportunities.

art
  • 04 August 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Advantages of arbitration over litigation

Arbitration is a method of resolving disputes outside the court system, with the dispute being determined by an independent arbitrator or tribunal rather than a judge. Whether a dispute is best resolved through arbitration or litigation will ultimately depend on the particular facts and circumstances of the case.

art
  • 04 August 2026
  • Immigration

Home Office revokes EU Settlement Scheme Status ‘Granted in Error’ – What does This Mean for EU Citizens?

Recent reports that the Home Office has begun revoking the immigration status of some EU nationals on the basis that it was originally “granted in error” have caused understandable concern among immigration practitioners and those with status under the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS).