Search

How can we help?

Icon

Using preferred pronouns for transgender individuals

In the case of Mackereth v The Department for Work and Pensions and another, the Claimant was a doctor who refused to use transgender individuals’ preferred pronouns and titles as he claimed it went against his Christian beliefs.  This was notwithstanding the fact that his employer’s gender reassignment policy stated that employees “should always address the customer in their presented sex” and that the customer should be “referred to in their presented gender at all times”.

When he refused, the Claimant was told that he could not work directly with customers and was subsequently dismissed. He was told that misgendering customers could be considered as harassment under the Equality Act. The Claimant issued a number of claims in the Employment Tribunal including that he had been discriminated against because of his Christian beliefs.  His claims were unsuccessful.

This was notwithstanding the fact that his employer’s gender reassignment policy stated that employees “should always address the customer in their presented sex” and that the customer should be “referred to in their presented gender at all times”.

The Tribunal held that refusing to refer to a transgender person by their preferred pronoun and title would be in breach of the Equality Act and potentially the Gender Recognition Act. The Tribunal panel unanimously concluded that a “lack of belief in, and conscientious objection to, transgenderism is incompatible with human dignity and conflicts with the fundamental rights of others”.

This case emphasises the importance of providing clear guidance and training on equality and diversity in the workplace and the conduct that could contravene the Equality Act.

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

Pub
  • 27 March 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

Shareholder Disputes: What to do when disputes arise – Episode 4

Join Stuart Mullins and Jack Hobbs for episode four of our Shareholder Disputes podcast series as they confront the realities of shareholder fallouts and share practical strategies for managing these complex situations.

art
  • 24 March 2026
  • Immigration

Spouse Visa – Is your relationship genuine and subsisting?

For years many couples have become frustrated by the requirements for a spouse visa as the rules and guidance are difficult to understand. A significant amount of applications are rejected on the basis of the applicant not providing the adequate documents to evidence the relationship requirement.

art
  • 20 March 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

Drag-Along & Tag-Along Rights: Why Every Company Needs Them

When starting a company, very few founders are aware of the potential issues around shares, share ownership and the implications of that when selling their company.

art
  • 19 March 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

WhatsApp in the Workplace

This article explores the potential risks of using WhatsApp for workplace communications, the implications for GDPR compliance and under UK legislation, and provides practical tips for employers to mitigate these risks.

art
  • 16 March 2026
  • Employment

Trade Union Law Changes from April 2026

April brings the next tranche of reforms under the Employment Rights Act 2025 including changes to the statutory recognition scheme making it easier for trade unions to be recognised in the workplace.

Pub
  • 16 March 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

Shareholder Disputes: Managing Shareholder Buyouts and Exits – Episode 3

Join Stuart Mullins and Nicky Goringe Larkin for the third episode of our Shareholder Disputes series, where we move from prevention to resolution—exploring what happens when a founder’s exit becomes unavoidable.