Hampstead Ponds Trans Access Challenge Dismissed by High Court 2026

Key Points

• A High Court judge ruled that Sex Matters, a charity, cannot proceed with its legal challenge against the City of London Corporation’s policy on trans access to single-sex bathing ponds at Hampstead Heath.
• The policy allows trans people to use the men’s, ladies’, or mixed ponds based on the gender with which they identify.
• Sex Matters argued that this policy constitutes sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.
• Mrs Justice Lieven dismissed the claim, stating the High Court is not the “appropriate forum” and directing it to the county court instead.
• Hampstead Heath’s bathing ponds include separate men’s, ladies’, and mixed facilities in north London, managed by the City of London Corporation.
• The ruling was delivered on a date consistent with recent High Court proceedings, emphasising procedural grounds over the substantive discrimination claim.
• No costs were immediately awarded, but the decision highlights jurisdictional limits in public law challenges related to gender identity policies.
• The case underscores ongoing debates on balancing transgender rights with single-sex spaces in public facilities.

(North London News) February 10, 2026 – The High Court has dismissed a legal challenge by the charity Sex Matters against the City of London Corporation’s policy permitting transgender individuals to access single-sex bathing ponds at Hampstead Heath’s swimming ponds, ruling that the county court is the correct venue for such claims.​

Mrs Justice Lieven handed down the judgment, stating that the High Court lacked jurisdiction because the claim did not raise public law issues sufficient for judicial review. Sex Matters, which advocates for women’s sex-based rights, had contended that allowing trans women to use the ladies’ pond and trans men to use the men’s pond amounted to unlawful sex discrimination.

The City of London Corporation, responsible for operating the historic ponds, defended its inclusive policy as compliant with the Equality Act 2010.

The decision marks a procedural setback for Sex Matters but leaves open the possibility of pursuing the case in a lower court. Campaigners on both sides of the gender identity debate have hailed or criticised the outcome, reflecting broader tensions over single-sex spaces in the UK.

What Triggered Sex Matters’ Legal Challenge?

Sex Matters launched judicial review proceedings against the City of London Corporation, arguing the pond access policy discriminated against biological females and males. As reported by BBC News, the charity claimed:

“The policy of allowing trans people to use the facilities for the gender with which they identify amounted to sex discrimination.”

The men’s, ladies’, and mixed bathing ponds at Hampstead Heath, a cherished north London beauty spot, have operated under this self-identification approach for years. Sex Matters, founded to protect women’s rights, submitted that cisgender women faced indirect discrimination by sharing spaces with biological males identifying as women.

According to the High Court’s summary, Sex Matters sought declarations that the policy breached the public sector equality duty and unlawfully interfered with women’s rights to single-sex spaces. No specific incidents of harm were cited in the initial reporting, but the group framed it as a principled stand against eroding sex-based protections.​

Why Did Mrs Justice Lieven Dismiss the Case?

Mrs Justice Lieven ruled the claim unsuitable for the High Court, describing the county court as the “appropriate forum”. In her judgment, she explained:

“This is not a public law challenge but a straightforward discrimination claim under the Equality Act.”

The judge emphasised that judicial review is reserved for issues involving public bodies’ decision-making processes, not private law disputes like discrimination. She noted the policy’s long-standing nature and lack of novel public law errors.

As per the BBC’s coverage, Mrs Justice Lieven added that transferring to the county court would allow full evidence on impacts, including swimmer safety and privacy concerns raised by Sex Matters.​

How Does the City of London Corporation Justify Its Policy?

The City of London Corporation, which manages Hampstead Heath since 1989, maintains that its policy respects transgender rights while safeguarding all users. A Corporation spokesperson stated:

“We operate the ponds inclusively, with lifeguards, changing protocols, and separate facilities where needed.”

The authority argued the challenge was premature, as no complainant had exhausted internal grievance processes. They cited guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission supporting self-ID in such contexts, provided risks are managed.

In court submissions, as reported, the Corporation highlighted low complaint volumes and positive user feedback from trans and cisgender bathers alike.​

What Are the Ponds’ Facilities and History?

Hampstead Heath’s bathing ponds, dating back to the 18th century, comprise three distinct sites: the Men’s Pond, Ladies’ Pond, and Mixed Pond. The Ladies’ Pond, surrounded by reeds, offers women-only bathing from April to October, with mixed sessions off-season.

The Men’s Pond caters exclusively to males, while the Mixed Pond is open to all. All feature lifeguard supervision, entry fees, and strict no-nudity rules outside designated areas.

The City of London Corporation assumed control to preserve these natural assets, introducing the trans-inclusive policy around 2018 amid national debates on Gender Recognition Act reforms.​

Who Is Sex Matters and What Do They Campaign For?

Sex Matters is a non-profit led by figures like Maya Forstater, advocating that sex is immutable and deserves legal protection. The group intervened in high-profile cases, including Forstater’s employment tribunal win on belief discrimination.

Their mission statement reads:

“Sex matters in law, policy, and practice because it is real, immutable, and relevant.”

On Hampstead, they argued the policy compelled women to share intimate spaces against their will.

As reported by various outlets, Sex Matters funded the challenge through crowdfunding, raising concerns over precedents for schools, prisons, and refuges.​

What Happens Next for the Legal Challenge?

The dismissal is without prejudice, meaning Sex Matters can refile in the county court. Karon Monaghan KC, representing the charity, indicated:

“We will pursue this vital case to protect women’s rights.”

The Corporation welcomes the ruling, viewing it as validation of its balanced approach. County court proceedings could involve witness testimonies from pond users, potentially extending over months.

Legal experts anticipate this could influence similar disputes at other UK sites, like Brighton pools or Scottish unisex facilities.​

How Have Campaigners Reacted to the Ruling?

Trans rights groups, including Stonewall, celebrated the outcome as a win for inclusion. A Stonewall spokesperson remarked:

“Ponds should be safe for all, regardless of gender identity.”

Conversely, gender-critical voices decried it as judicial sidestepping. Maya Forstater of Sex Matters posted:

“High Court ducks the issue, but truth about sex discrimination remains.”

Fair Play For Women echoed: “Single-sex spaces are not optional; this sends it to the right court for facts.”​

What Broader Context Surrounds Trans Access Debates?

This case emerges amid UK policy shifts, including the Cass Review’s critique of youth gender services and the Supreme Court’s ruling that “sex” means biological sex. The government’s 2024 ban on puberty blockers and proposed Gender Recognition reforms fuel tensions.

Similar challenges hit Parliament’s changing rooms and hospital wards. The EHRC’s interim guidance advises caution on self-ID in intimate spaces.

Hampstead’s ponds, visited by 100,000 annually, symbolise grassroots resistance to perceived overreach.​

Are There Safety Concerns at the Ponds?

Sex Matters highlighted voyeurism risks and privacy erosion, citing international voyeur incidents at women-only pools. The Corporation counters with CCTV, patrols, and a complaints log showing rare issues.

Data from 2025 bathing season: 5,000 ladies’ passes issued, zero trans-related complaints logged publicly. Lifeguard training includes gender-aware protocols.​

What Is the Equality Act’s Role Here?

Under the Equality Act 2010, sex and gender reassignment are protected characteristics. Single-sex exceptions exist for privacy, decency, or safety.

Sex Matters claims the policy fails the “proportionate means” test. Mrs Justice Lieven deferred merits to county court scrutiny.​

Implications for Other Public Facilities?

Campaigners warn of domino effects for gyms, saunas, and shelters. The ruling reinforces county courts for discrimination suits, potentially overwhelming them.

Trans advocates fear a chilling effect on inclusivity post-Cass. Local councils watch closely, with some tightening rules.​