In a claim raising issues described by the Judge as “important, current, controversial and of public interest”, the High Court has ruled that participation by police officers in a Pride event was unlawful, on the basis that it breached duties of impartiality.
The claim for judicial review was brought by Lindsey Smith, a gender-critical lesbian, who objected to the participation of officers in Newcastle’s Pride in the City 2024. The officers marched in the parade, and staffed a stall displaying the colours of the Progress flag, at which a police van painted in the Progress colours was stationed.
In a judgment handed down today, Mr Justice Linden held that by authorising officers to participate in Pride in the ways they did, the Chief Constable of the force, Vanessa Jardine, made a decision which was not legally open to her, since “on any view” the activities authorised “would be likely to give rise to the impression amongst members of the public that they may” interfere with the officers’ impartial discharge of their policing duties. The decision was therefore irrational. The Court held further that it was irrational on further bases, including that the Chief Constable had misunderstood the nature of the public sector equality duty.
At paragraph [130] of the Judgment, Linden J said: “… I accept the evidence filed on behalf of the Claimant … that Northern Pride clearly and strongly supports gender ideology and transgender rights and it campaigns accordingly, including for changes in law and policy which reflect its views. The 2024 March was, at the very least, partly organised as part of Northern Pride’s campaigning activities and to promote that agenda. Those who do not agree with the position of Northern Pride on transgender rights are not welcome on marches organised by Northern Pride. The participants in the March also appear to share the beliefs of Northern Pride and to support the aims of the transgender community. They marched, at least partly, because they wanted to demonstrate that this was the case and to express their support for the LGBTQIA+ cause. It is not necessary to describe this aspect of the March as “political” for the Claimant to succeed, but that is what it was”.
The judgment is expected to inform decisions by various bodies as to participation in Pride or similar events.
Tom Cross KC acted successfully for the Claimant, instructed by Conrathe Gardner LLP. You can read the judgment here.
