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
  • 28 August 2026
  • Immigration

Right to Work and Sponsor Licence Changes 2026: Key dates for businesses

In this podcast, immigration solicitors Ruth Karimatsenga and Monica Mastropasqua discuss the key immigration compliance changes coming into force in September and October 2026 and what employers, HR teams, sponsors and individuals should do to prepare.

art
  • 28 August 2026
  • Commercial Real Estate

Modernising security of tenure: The Law Commission’s follow up consultation paper

On 16th June 2026, the Commission published its second consultation paper: Business Tenancies: the right to renew – modernising security of tenure.

Pub
  • 27 August 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

The Highly Expedited Arbitration Provisions – ICC Rules 2026 – Factsheet

This factsheet provides an overview of the ICC’s Highly Expedited Arbitration Provisions (HEAP), outlining some of the key procedural features introduced by Appendix VI of the 2026 Rules and the potential benefits of this new expedited process.

art
  • 27 August 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

EMIs – April 2026 changes explained

On 6 April 2026 the Enterprise Management Incentive scheme (EMI) was expanded to make EMIs accessible to a wider range of businesses.

art
  • 19 August 2026
  • Employment

Managing employee redundancies: Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

Redundancy should be an employer’s last option when restructuring their business. There are necessary steps that should be taken to ensure that redundancy is the best move forward

art
  • 18 August 2026
  • Immigration

Home Office curtailment of Sponsored Workers’ permission: Why employers and employees must act quickly

The Home Office has recently changed the speed at which it processes sponsor notifications following the end of a sponsored worker’s employment.