EHRC Code of Practice — Services, Public Functions and Associations (2026)

In brief

Statutory Code of Practice issued by the EHRC under s.14 Equality Act 2006, giving guidance on the Equality Act 2010 as it applies to services, public functions and associations. The Code is a statutory code of practice, not the law: failing to follow it does not of itself make anyone liable, but it is admissible in evidence and a court or tribunal must take it into account where it appears relevant (Equality Act 2006 s.15(4)). The law is the Act as the courts interpret it. The Code sets out its guidance on proportionality for services and public functions under Part 3 and Schedule 3 of the Equality Act 2010, and for associations under Part 7. In the Code's account: (1) the Act does not prohibit sex discrimination where a provider offers separate services for each sex, or a service to one sex only, if the relevant conditions are met, including that the provision is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (paras 13.92, 13.94, 13.99); in many cases a mix of single-/separate-sex and mixed-sex services will be proportionate (para 13.122), and providing only a mixed-sex service, without any separate or single-sex option, could be direct or indirect sex discrimination against women who use the service or lead to unlawful harassment against them, most likely in contexts like those in para 13.116 (para 13.133); (2) the Code says a provider of single- or separate-sex provision must be able to demonstrate that it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (paras 13.113–13.122, 13.143), with the impact on trans people weighed in that balance (paras 13.119–13.121) and alternatives and exceptions to a policy considered (paras 13.135, 13.137–13.141); that the greater financial cost of a less discriminatory approach cannot by itself provide a justification, and cost can only be considered as part of the justification if there are other good reasons for adopting it (para 5.54); and that disproportionate financial cost may make alternative arrangements not reasonably possible (paras 13.126, 13.141); (3) having carried out the balancing exercise, a provider may conclude that arrangements or adaptions can be made to meet the needs of all service users, or that it remains proportionate to maintain only a separate or single-sex service (para 13.121); if it does run one, trans people of the opposite sex are excluded from it because of their sex (para 13.119); the Code says that a service that admits them is no longer a separate or single-sex service under the Act (paras 13.130, 13.144) and is very likely to amount to unlawful sex discrimination against people of the opposite sex who are not allowed to use it (paras 13.131, 13.144). Under the Act, where a separate or single-sex service meets the conditions for it (Sch 3 paras 26–27; For Women Scotland [220]), preventing, limiting or modifying a trans person's access to the service for their own sex is not unlawful gender reassignment discrimination if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (Sch 3 para 28; Code para 13.145). The Code says that not acting proportionately is very likely to be direct or indirect gender reassignment discrimination (para 13.149); it advises that a provider should only consider excluding a trans person from the service for their own sex on a case-by-case basis (para 13.147); and it says that for services necessary for everybody, such as toilets, it is very unlikely to be proportionate to leave a trans person with no service they are allowed to use (para 13.148). Under For Women Scotland [2025] UKSC 16 (FWS-UKSC-2025), which is the authority, sex, woman and man mean biological sex in the Act ([264]) and a GRC does not change sex for its purposes; the Code restates the ruling at paras 2.49–2.50 and 2.88–2.89, and says trans people are protected from gender reassignment discrimination (para 2.52). The GOV.UK publication page for the 2026 Code states that it came into force on 5 August 2026 and that the 2011 Services Code was revoked on the same date.

Key provisions

• paras-13-167-to-13-168 — Communicating that a service is single-sex (13.167–13.168) : Para 13.167: in many cases the primary means of ensuring lawful single-/separate-sex provision is clearly communicating that the service is available to one sex only - by proportionate means likely to be effective, which may include signage, promotional materials (online and hard copy) and verbal information at enrolment, admission or induction. Para 13.168: where, regardless of such communications, there is clear evidence of an issue with members of the opposite sex accessing or seeking to access the service, it may be legitimate to ask individuals to confirm, by proportionate means, that they are of the eligible sex.
• paras-2-87-to-2-89 — The Code restates For Women Scotland: sex means biological sex in the Act (2.88–2.89) : Paras 2.88–2.89 state the For Women Scotland ruling: 'sex', 'woman' and 'man' in the Act mean biological sex, biological woman and biological man, and a GRC does not change a person's sex for the purposes of the Act (see also 2.49–2.50); a trans person is protected from discrimination because of gender reassignment, whether they have a GRC or not (2.52).
• paras-2-52-to-2-53 — Gender reassignment and sex discrimination protection (2.52–2.53) : Para 2.52: a trans person will be protected from discrimination because of gender reassignment, whether they have a GRC or not. Para 2.53: a trans person will also be protected from sex discrimination whether they have a GRC or not, based on their sex at birth and, in the circumstances listed there, related to their acquired gender.
• paras-13-92-to-13-113 — Single- and separate-sex services: conditions and proportionality (paras 13.92–13.113, 13.122, 13.133) : The Act does not prohibit sex discrimination by providing separate services for each sex (Schedule 3 paragraph 26) or a service to one sex only (paragraph 27) where the relevant conditions are met, including that the provision is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (paras 13.92–13.111); the Code says the provider must be able to demonstrate that (para 13.113). It says that in many cases a mix of single- or separate-sex and mixed-sex provision will be proportionate (para 13.122), and that providing only a mixed-sex service, without any separate or single-sex option, could itself be direct or indirect sex discrimination against women who use the service, or lead to unlawful harassment against them, most likely in contexts like those in para 13.116 (para 13.133); in the Code, the impact on trans people is weighed in the proportionality balance (paras 13.119–13.121).
• paras-13-113-to-13-133 — The Code's proportionality framework — justification for separate and single-sex services : The Code says a provider of a separate or single-sex service must be able to demonstrate that doing so is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (13.113–13.114). It says that, in considering proportionality, the provider should consider all potential service users and whether there is a fair balance between the benefits of the service, the needs of those accessing it and the impact on those excluded (13.115), and whether there is a less intrusive option than excluding trans people which would be proportionate (13.120). The Code also says the greater financial cost of a less discriminatory approach cannot by itself provide a justification, and that cost can only be considered as part of the justification if there are other good reasons for adopting it (para 5.54); it says that disproportionate financial cost may make alternative arrangements not reasonably possible (paras 13.126, 13.141). In the Code, the impact on trans people is weighed in that balance (paras 13.119–13.121). Within its treatment of separate and single-sex services, the Code's 'case-by-case' wording appears only for excluding a trans person from the service for their own sex (paras 13.128, 13.147); on alternatives and exceptions to a policy see paras 13.135 and 13.137–13.141. Under the Act, where a separate or single-sex service meets the conditions for it (Sch 3 paras 26–27; For Women Scotland [220]), excluding a trans person from the service for their own sex is not unlawful gender reassignment discrimination if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (Sch 3 para 28; Code para 13.145); the Code says that not acting proportionately is very likely to be direct or indirect gender reassignment discrimination (para 13.149).
• paras-13-130-to-13-131 — The Code: a service intended for one sex that admits trans people of the opposite sex is not a separate or single-sex service under the Act (13.130–13.131) : The Code says that a service provided only to women and trans women, or only to men and trans men, is not a separate or single-sex service under the Act, and that its provider cannot rely on the exceptions described at the Code's paras 13.99 to 13.111 (para 13.130). It says such a service is very likely to amount to unlawful sex discrimination against the people of the opposite sex who are not allowed to use it; a service provided to women and trans women could also be unlawful sex discrimination or lead to unlawful harassment against women who use it, and similar considerations apply to a service provided for men and trans men (para 13.131).
• paras-13-145-to-13-151 — The Code on the Sch 3 para 28 exception (13.145–13.149) and worked examples (13.150–13.151) : Paras 13.145–13.151: where a separate or single-sex service is justified, preventing, limiting or modifying a trans person's access to the service for their own sex is not unlawful gender reassignment discrimination if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (13.145, citing Sch 3 para 28). The Code advises that a provider should only consider excluding a trans person from the service for their own sex on a case-by-case basis (13.147), and says that not acting proportionately is very likely to be direct or indirect gender reassignment discrimination (13.149); 13.150–13.151 are worked examples. Para 13.148 says: 'The service provider should consider whether there is a suitable alternative service for the trans person to use. In the case of services which are necessary for everybody, such as toilets, it is very unlikely to be proportionate to put a trans person in a position where there is no service that they are allowed to use.'
• paras-13-161-to-13-182 — Asking about sex (13.160–13.182) and recording decisions (13.129) : Paras 13.161–13.182 deal with asking about sex. The Code says a request must be objectively justified and a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, of which lawful single- or separate-sex provision is an example (13.162–13.163). It says that in many cases the primary means of ensuring lawful single- or separate-sex provision is clear communication (13.167); asking individuals to confirm their sex may be legitimate where there is clear evidence of an issue with the opposite sex seeking access (13.168, 13.172), done sensitively and away from others (13.165, 13.171–13.173). It says a person who confirms they are not of the eligible sex may be required to leave (13.178). Privacy, Gender Recognition Act 2004 s.22 and data protection apply (13.181–13.182). Separately, the Code calls it good practice to record the reasons for a decision to provide or not to provide a separate or single-sex service, along with any supporting evidence (13.129).
• oeo-equality-impact-assessment — OEO Equality Impact Assessment published with the Code : The OEO/MWRE combined Equality Impact Assessment published alongside the Code (21 May 2026) found, on the record, that following the Code produces negative gender-reassignment impacts across all three PSED limbs. It flags risks the EHRC's own EIA does not resolve: double exclusion (excluded from the service for the opposite sex because of their sex (13.119) and, where it is proportionate, from the service for their own sex (13.145–13.147), leaving no service at all); involuntary disclosure / outing; third-space-provision gap; gender policing; safeguarding. In the Code, preventing discomfort or distress for other service users might be a legitimate aim for excluding a trans person from the service for their own sex, where other service users could reasonably object, considered case by case (13.147); the exclusion is not unlawful gender reassignment discrimination if it is a proportionate means of achieving that aim (13.145, citing Sch 3 para 28), the provider should consider whether there is a suitable alternative service, and for services which are necessary for everybody, such as toilets, it is very unlikely to be proportionate to leave a trans person with no service they are allowed to use (13.148). The Code's own limits on such exclusion are at 13.145–13.149.
• no-document-reliably-evidences-sex-13-179 — Asking about sex, and no official UK document reliably evidencing sex (§§13.160–13.182) : The Code says there is no type of official record or document in the UK which provides reliable evidence of sex: sex on passports and driving licences may be changed with or without a GRC, and birth certificates may reflect the acquired gender of someone who has a GRC (§13.179). It says it is unlikely to be either practical or appropriate to approach a particular individual about their sex in relation to facilities, such as toilets, that are incidental to the primary service (§13.170). In many cases, it says, the primary means of ensuring lawful single-sex provision is clear communication — signage, promotional materials, information given at enrolment, admission or induction (§13.167). It says that where, despite clear communication, there is clear evidence of an issue with members of the opposite sex accessing or seeking to access the service, it may be legitimate to ask individuals to confirm their sex by proportionate means; evidence of concern may include physique, physical appearance, behaviour or concerns raised by other service users, though it is not always possible to be sure of a person's sex from appearance, and whether to approach any particular individual depends on all the circumstances (§§13.168–13.169). It says that where a genuine concern about an answer remains, asking for further evidence of sex is unlikely to be proportionate or practical, and the relevant factors are weighed (§§13.179–13.180). The Code notes that onward disclosure, without consent, of information that someone has or has applied for a GRC, or of their sex, may be a criminal offence in some circumstances under GRA s.22 (§13.181); the Code says information about sex is likely to constitute special category data under DPA 2018 / UK GDPR (§13.182).

When relevant

Cite when: (a) services-side discrimination is at issue (EA 2010 Part 3 + Sch.3); the Code covers services, public functions and associations only, not employment: for staff toilets, changing rooms, uniform or any other workplace point, use EA 2010 Part 5, the EHRC Employment Code (EHRC-EMP-COP) and the Workplace Regulations 1992 (WHSWR1992), not chapter 13 of this Code; (b) single-sex or separate-sex provision is in issue - facilities, accommodation, healthcare, sports, support services; (c) any post-FWS EA 2010 definition question (sex, woman, man) - the authority is For Women Scotland [2025] UKSC 16 (FWS-UKSC-2025), which Code paras 2.88–2.89 restate (para 2.87 restates the definitions in ss.11 and 212); (d) proportionality analysis in services contexts: in our view, the Code's guidance shows how the EHRC expects the courts' proportionality test (Bank Mellat / Akerman-Livingstone, from the case law) to be applied to services; (e) Part 7 associations - the Code covers associations alongside services and public functions; (f) questions about asking a person about a protected characteristic, including sex (paras 13.160–13.182), or about recording the reasons for a separate or single-sex decision (para 13.129); (g) signage, door labelling or communication questions: para 13.167 says that in many cases the primary means of ensuring lawful single- or separate-sex provision is to clearly communicate that the service is available to one sex only, by proportionate means likely to be effective, which may include signage, promotional materials and verbal information at enrolment, admission or induction; para 13.168 says that where, regardless of such communications, there is clear evidence of an issue with members of the opposite sex accessing or seeking to access the service, it may be legitimate to ask individuals to confirm, by proportionate means, that they are of the eligible sex.