Press Release

Darlington nurses’ legal victory: Trust pays out £187,000 in damages, apologises, and commits to separate changing facilities between male and female staff

24 June 2026         Issued by: Christian Concern

A group of NHS nurses from Darlington have secured substantial damages from County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust, following their landmark Employment Tribunal victory in January 2026.

The case, brought by seven nurses at Darlington Memorial Hospital, Bethany Hutchison, Lisa Lockey, Karen Danson, Tracy Hooper, Annice Grundy, Carly Hoy and Jane Peveller, was supported by the Christian Legal Centre, which has provided the nurses with legal, media and pastoral support from the beginning of their ordeal.

The case has become one of the most significant legal challenges in recent years concerning the freedom of female staff to access single-sex spaces in the workplace, with the nurses being compared to the Ford Dagenham workers and being dubbed ‘The Angels of the North.’

In January, Employment Judge Seamus Sweeney, ruled that the policy, which had been in place at the Trust for years allowing men who identify as women to access the female staff changing room, had amounted to unlawful discrimination.

Following extensive and at times deeply protracted negotiations, The Trust has now paid out £187,000 in damages to the nurses, which does not include legal costs, which are still to be decided at a further hearing.

This figure also does not include the Trust’s own legal costs of £603,000, and counting, spent on defending its position of allowing men into female changing rooms.

Last week the Care Quality Commission released a report which found the Trust is ‘unsafe’ and has a ‘blame culture’ and is ‘badly led.’

The apology

As part of the settlement, the Trust has also formally apologised to the nurses. They said in a letter to each nurse:

“we recognise that we have a responsibility to provide a safe, respectful and inclusive working environment for everyone and the Tribunal’s findings make clear that we did not get this right for you, for which the Trust expresses its sincere apologies.”

Furthermore, they say that:

“We also acknowledge that in our decision making, we did not adequately consider your concerns, formally or informally and we sincerely regret that we were unable to get this right. In light of the judgment, we have reviewed our policies and the changes that have already been put in place and will consider what facilities are required to follow the Tribunal’s findings in a way that is respectful to all of our colleagues.

The Trust is committed to ensuring that we support all colleagues and is committed to doing so through our respective policies, procedures and actions as well as learning from the findings of this judgment.
We know that this has been a difficult and distressing experience for you. We also recognise that, at times, your concerns were not fully heard or addressed in a timely or sensitive manner, and we regret the impact this had on you and colleagues who have been affected by this process and subsequent judgment.”

Commitment to single-sex changing facilities

As part of the settlement, the Trust has now also agreed to:

  • Provide changing facilities, washing facilities and sanitary conveniences as separate between biological men and biological women.
  • Continue to provide suitable and sufficient changing facilities, washing facilities and sanitary conveniences in accordance with its obligations under The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, the Equality Act 2010, the Human Rights Act 1998 and any other legislation and/or guidance that would be applicable at the time.
  • It has withdrawn its policy known as ‘‘Transitioning in the Workplace policy’’ (v3.0) POL/PD/0060 (and, for the avoidance of doubt, all previous versions of that policy).
  • Any future policy replacing the “Transitioning in the workplace policy”, or any other policy affecting the Claimants’ right to be provided with single-sex changing, sanitary or washing facilities, will fully comply with the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, the Equality Act 2010, the Human Rights Act 1998 and any other legislation and/or guidance as would be applicable at the time.
  • It has also agreed to provide suitable training to its management staff based on the lessons learned from the case and the Tribunal judgment, with a view to preventing any repetition of such discrimination or harassment of female staff as the Tribunal has found to have taken place against the Claimants.

The Trust has, however, refused to rule out taking disciplinary action against the nurses for speaking about their case, despite the Tribunal ruling going to the media was ‘a protected act.’

For every woman and girl

Bethany Hutchison, President of the Darlington Nursing Union, said:

“We have done this, not just for ourselves, but for our colleagues who were too afraid or unable to speak up, and for every woman and girl in the country.

We raised our concerns because we believed something was seriously wrong, not just for us, but for the protection of all women in the NHS. Instead of being listened to, we were ignored, labelled, and subjected to pressure and intimidation.

This outcome is a vindication of our stand for dignity, privacy, and common sense. We hope it ensures that no woman is ever again made to feel unsafe in her workplace for speaking the truth.”

Andrea Williams, Chief Executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said:

“This is a landmark victory for these courageous nurses who refused to back down despite extraordinary pressure from an NHS that has fought with everything it has to allow men into women’s changing rooms  and to trample over biological reality.

The evidence exposed during the trial revealed a deeply concerning culture within the Trust, where safeguarding concerns were minimised and women were marginalised.

The law is clear: employers must protect the rights, dignity, and safety of their staff. This case sends a powerful message across the NHS and beyond that ideology cannot override those fundamental duties.”

“We call upon the Health Secretary to ensure the the law on single sex spaces is upheld and policies rolled out across the whole of the NHS to ensure this happens.

“We call upon the Trust to immediately ensure that all NMC disciplinary action against the Darlington nurses for bringing their case is immediately withdrawn.”

How the case began

The dispute began in July 2023, when female nurses raised serious concerns with management. They said they had been required, without warning or consultation, to share changing facilities with a biological male colleague who identifies as female and is known as “Rose.”

Rose has a very masculine appearance, is tall with strong build, and had shared with that he was trying to get his female partner pregnant.

The nurses were told that the ‘Transitioning in the Workplace’ policy allowed men to access the female changing room ‘due to the inclusivity of the NHS.’

300 women needed access to this changing room, including teenage female staff.

In March 2024, 26 nurses formally wrote to the Trust raising concerns rooted in privacy, cultural sensitivity, and experiences of abuse.

Their concerns were brushed aside, however, with staff told to by a HR manager that they needed to “broaden their mindset,” “be educated,” and ‘compromise’ and ‘be more inclusive’.

On 28 May 2024, the nurses filed legal proceedings with the Newcastle Employment Tribunal on the grounds of sexual harassment and sex discrimination, and initially went public with their story anonymously.

Despite this, management continued to ignore their concerns.

A month later, four of the nurses, went fully public with their story during the lead up to the General Election, sparking a debate in the media and among prospective Labour government ministers about whether women can have penises.

The story went viral, with support from J.K. Rowling leading to Wes Streeting, just ahead of becoming health secretary, agreeing to meet the nurses saying he was ‘horrified’ by their case.

However, coming into work following the news breaking, the nurses found a sign taped onto the female staff changing room which read: INCLUSIVE CHANGING SPACE.

Rather than resolving the issue, in July 2024 the Trust followed its own Stonewall-inspired policy that, any woman who has an issue getting changed with a man who identifies as a woman, would have to find alternative facilities.

A ward manager’s office was therefore converted into a “temporary” alternative changing area.

The nurses initially had to put their belongings on the floor, there were no lockers, and the room opened directly onto a public corridor and clinical area, which could open at any time.

The nurses would use this ‘temporary’ changing room for 10 months, while Rose continued to use the female changing room.

Forming a Union

Throughout this time, the nurses received no support from any unions, including Unison and the Royal College of Nursing.

In October 2024, the nurses met Wes Streeting and he told them that “something has gone wrong in our society”,  that equality debates had created “unnecessary conflict”, and that he wanted biological reality to be restored to the NHS under his watch.

The President of Unison, Steve North, however, responded to the meeting by accusing the health secretary of ‘pandering to transphobic bigotry’.

In response, and with the support of the Christian Legal Centre, the nurses established their own union—the Darlington Nursing Union (DNU)—the first of its kind dedicated to protecting women’s rights in the workplace.

They went on to engage nationally with policymakers, meeting the Leader of the Opposition, Kemi Badenoch, Shadow Equalities Minister, Claire Coutinho, and multiple MPs and peers.

Legal proceedings and escalation

In January 2025, the Trust attempted to impose reporting restrictions relating to “Rose,” but the tribunal rejected the application. Nurses gave evidence that they had been intimidated after bringing their case.
Throughout 2025, the case continued to intensify.

The Royal College of Nursing warned the Trust it was acting unlawfully and must provide single-sex spaces “without delay.”

Despite this, the Trust reissued its policy in April 2025, continuing to permit biological males access to women’s changing rooms.

The landmark Supreme Court’s April 2025 ruling on the definition of “woman” led to Wes Streeting promising new rules for the NHS ‘within weeks’, but nothing materialised.

In May, Darlington nurse Karen Danson, who had been anonymous until this point, went public with her story describing how encountering “Rose” in the changing room triggered PTSD linked to childhood sexual abuse.

She also described how the Trust had tried to force her to have Rose take part in her gynaecological operation. She was told: ‘But Rose is a woman.’

Following this story, Wes Streeting sent a senior NHS England official  to Darlington Memorial Hospital to urgently sort the situation after it was found that the changing facilities were inadequate.

Nothing changed, however. Rose continued to use the female changing room.

Evidence exposed during three-week tribunal hearing

During a three-week Employment Tribunal hearing in October and November 2025, extensive and, at times, troubling evidence was revealed about the Trust’s conduct.

The tribunal heard that nurses were pressured and intimidated to withdraw or dilute their safeguarding concerns.

Their concerns were dismissed internally as “noise in the system” by senior HR figures.

Director of Workforce, Andrew Thacker, said he believed ‘Rose’ was ‘just a large woman’.

Further evidence included that the Trust’s EDI lead had labelled the nurses “cisgender”, that Rose’s rights outweighed theirs, and that the Trust’s policy guidance was legally outdated.

A senior NHS executive had warned internally that the policy amounted to “politically correct nonsense” before their departure.

Safeguarding complaints were turned into what was described as a campaign of intimidation, including escalation to regulators.

Basic health, safety, and wellbeing risks were not properly assessed, later admitted by senior leadership.

In a significant failing, equality policy considerations were prioritised over fundamental safety requirements, including the Trust not ensuring the ‘temporary’ changing room for the nurses was fire safe, putting them at further risk.

The tribunal heard deeply personal testimony from nurses, including distressing experiences in the changing rooms, concerns about behaviour, and references to a “deep male voice” heightening fear and vulnerability.

Further evidence included an account relayed by Bethany Hutchison involving a pregnant colleague who was allegedly subjected to inappropriate personal comments about her body while in the changing room, intensifying concerns about privacy and dignity.

The nurses were represented in court by Niazi Fetto KC and solicitor, Pavel Stroilov.

‘Violated their dignity’

Following closing submissions in November 2025, the tribunal reserved judgment.

On 16 January 2026, Employment Judge Seamus Sweeney handed down a landmark ruling, finding that the nurses had been treated unlawfully. He said:

“By requiring the Claimants to share a changing room with a biological male trans woman… the Respondent engaged in unwanted conduct related to sex and gender reassignment which had the effect of violating the dignity of the Claimants and creating for the Claimants a hostile, humiliating and degrading environment.

“By not taking seriously and declining to address the Claimants’ concerns of August and September 2023 and of 04 April 2024, regarding that part of the Transition in the Workplace Policy that afforded biological males access to the female changing room, the Respondent engaged in unwanted conduct related to sex and gender reassignment which had the effect of creating for the Claimants a hostile and intimidating environment.”

The Tribunal considered and followed last year’s seminal decision of the Supreme Court in For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers.

Ongoing NMC investigations despite tribunal findings

Despite the tribunal ruling that the nurses were treated unlawfully, four of the claimants, Bethany Hutchison, Lisa Lockey, Annice Grundy and Tracey Hooper, continue to face potential investigation by the Nursing and Midwifery Council.

The referrals were made in October 2025 at the height of the case, alleging “transphobia” and “hate crime” after the nurses spoke publicly about their concerns. However, during proceedings, the Employment Tribunal recognised that the nurses’ actions in raising concerns and speaking to the media constituted a “protected act” under equality law.

The nurses, supported by the Christian Legal Centre, have submitted detailed legal representations to the NMC, arguing that the complaints are ideologically motivated, lack any proper legal basis, and amount to further victimisation following their treatment by the Trust.

They maintain that continuing regulatory scrutiny, despite clear judicial findings in their favour, raises serious concerns about freedom of expression and the ability of healthcare professionals to speak out on matters of safety and safeguarding without fear of professional reprisal.

In April 2026, Leader of Opposition, Kemi Badenoch, called for the NMC to drop the ‘weak’ cases against the nurses, saying:

“It is clear, from the number of frontline nurses pursued for doing their jobs and subsequently vindicated in court, that the system is misfiring. The NMC, as the independent regulator, is responsible for ensuring it is put right. I am therefore writing to ask specifically why you continue to pursue investigations into the four Darlington nurses and Jennifer Melle which appear inconsistent with both the tribunal outcomes and the settled legal position on biological sex.”

  • Share
Privacy settings

Our website uses cookies, usage analysis and other technologies. We use these tools because they help us to run our website, provide you with content (including video and audio clips), understand how people use our website, make improvements to our services, and promote our work more effectively. This means that we and selected third-party services may store cookies and other similar information on your device, and may analyse how you use our website. Some of these tools are necessary for our website to function as intended but others are optional, and you can choose whether or not to allow them. You can find out more here.

Core functionality

Certain cookies and other technologies are used on our website to provide core functionality. You can read more about this here. You may be able to use your browser settings to block these tools but if you do, our website may not function as intended.

Embedded content

To enrich your experience of this website, we embed carefully selected content from other platforms. For example, we embed video clips from our YouTube channel, and audio clips from our SoundCloud channel. These third-party platforms may store and use cookies (or similar technology) on your device, and may analyse your use of this site or the embedded content. We do not directly control what technologies they use. You can find out more here. If embedded content is disabled it may affect your experience of this website.

Analytics and promotion

This website uses tools from selected third-party providers (Google and Facebook) to help us understand how people arrive at and use our website, and to measure and improve the effectiveness of some of our promotional activity. These tools may store and use cookies (and similar information) on your device, and analyse your use of this website, and other sites and platforms. These tools help us to improve our services, reach people who may be interested in our work and make better use of our resources but information may be shared with these third-party providers and may be used for their own purposes. You can find out more here.