Sutcliffe v Secretary of State for Education [2024] EWHC 1878 (Admin)

In brief

A maths teacher was struck off the teaching register by the Teaching Regulation Agency after deliberately misgendering a trans pupil and making adverse statements in media interviews. He brought a statutory appeal to the High Court challenging the TRA's decision. Pepperall J dismissed the appeal. Although the teacher held a gender-critical belief that was protected under s.10 EA 2010 (Forstater principles), the manifestation of that belief in the specific conduct toward a pupil was not protected. The TRA had correctly balanced Article 9 belief rights against the pupil's right to education, welfare and non-discrimination.

Key provisions

• paras-general — Belief protection does not licence conduct infringing others' rights: Holding a gender-critical belief is absolutely protected under s.10 EA 2010. Manifesting it through conduct (e.g., deliberate misgendering of a pupil) is subject to Article 9(2) proportionality — and where the conduct infringes the rights of a protected person (here a trans pupil), regulatory action can be justified.

When relevant

Cases where respondents invoke Forstater / gender-critical belief protection, Education-sector trans inclusion cases, Belief-manifestation proportionality analyses