For further information or advice in dealing with gender reassignment discrimination in the workplace, please contact our employment law specialists on 01332 226 155 or fill in the form below.
AB v Royal Borough of Kingston: Landmark case on transgender discrimination where deadnaming led to distress. Lessons for employers on policy and inclusivity.
30 January 2024
Case Study
In the recent case of AB v Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames, an employment tribunal has held that the employer had committed several acts of direct discrimination against a trans woman, including deadnaming her. “Deadnaming” occurs when a transgender person is referred to by the name they previously used before their transition.
The claimant, Miss AB, worked in the transport department at the council. Miss AB transitioned, giving her employer eight months’ notice before she did so. Upon her transition, Miss AB adopted a female name and pronouns. However, it took the council nearly two years to put those name changes in place in their systems. This affected her pension records, office door pass, parking pass, email system and the staff directory.
The tribunal found that she was unable to contact anyone to try to stop it without outing herself to a committee of people. Her locker had a post-it note put on it with her deadname crossed out and her post-transition name written on, in full view of everyone.
Case Study
The tribunal held that the instances in which the council used Miss AB’s deadname amounted to less favourable treatment and that this was because of her protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Other behaviour of the council, such as removing work from her and demanding an apology for raising an unofficial complaint, were also found to be because of her protected characteristic.
Inadequate policies
Miss AB complained that the council did not have appropriate policies in place to cover its obligations under the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal held that the policies the council did have in place were out of date and ultimately would not assist individuals like Miss AB. It also found that the council had not provided appropriate training to its staff, meaning that there was a failure to provide guidance to staff undergoing transition and to team managers.
However, the tribunal found that this did not amount to direct discrimination as it was not targeted at Miss AB nor was it because of her protected characteristic but it was “part of a wider unexplained … HR failing”.
Award
The tribunal found the deadnaming had caused Miss AB significant distress and had contributed to a deterioration in her mental health. She was awarded £21,000 as compensation for injury to feelings plus £4,423 in interest.
Comment
This case gives some useful reminders to employers. Firstly, employers should ensure that they have equality and diversity policies in place and that these are kept up to date with current law. Training should be carried out with staff on such policies. Secondly, although it seems obvious, employers should be proactive to ensure employees who have transitioned have their names and pronouns correctly and promptly changed across all mediums.
Related Services
The Court of Appeal has provided important guidance on the enforceability of training repayment clauses in employment contracts.
Read More
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has clarified when employers may be deemed to have knowledge of an employee's disability.
Read More
Download our probationary period resource pack to help prepare for the Employment Rights Act changes from January 2027.
Read More
An employer's failure to involve an employee in an investigation led to findings of disability discrimination and compensation.
Read More
The EAT highlights the limits of protected conversations and the risks employers face when discussions are handled incorrectly.
Read More
Employer ordered to pay over £264,000 after a reference referring to an ongoing dispute was found to amount to victimisation.
Read More
Download expert guidance on UK trade union reforms and prepare your organisation for Employment Rights Act changes.
Read More
EAT confirms endometriosis can be a disability and examines reasonable adjustments, dismissal risks and performance management issues for employers.
Read More
EAT confirms withdrawing a conditional job offer can breach contract with employers understanding when an offer is binding and notice applies.
Read More
EAT confirms leaving transferred staff on inferior terms can amount to indirect discrimination, even under TUPE.
Read More
EAT confirms dismissal must be based on the employer’s actual reason, not a substitute. Incorrect reasoning can make dismissal unfair.
Read More
EAT finds dismissal unfair in Milrine v DHL (2026). Key lessons for employers on appeal processes and reducing tribunal risk.
Read More