On 21 May 2026, the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC) revised Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations (the Code) was laid before Parliament. MPs and peers have 40 days to object – and if no objection is received the Secretary of State can activate the Code by commencement order.

The revised Code follows the Supreme Court’s April 2025 decision in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers, which clarified that the terms “man”, “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 mean biological sex. The Court ruled that a Gender Recognition Certificate does not change a person’s legal sex for Equality Act purposes, but confirmed trans people remain protected under the definition of gender reassignment.

Key changes in the Code address sex-based services, lawful limits on access based on sex and gender reassignment, competitive sport, and questions about sex. The guidance was shaped by two consultations, with around 50,000 responses.

Ongoing changes

The Code applies to services, public functions and associations. The EHRC has confirmed it will update its guidance for employers in due course, noting that following the For Women Scotland judgment its priority was to revise the relevant sections of the services Code, as a wider employment update was already in progress.

Legal status of the Code

The Code doesn't change the law and it's not a statement of the law. Once commenced, it can be used in legal proceedings under the Equality Act and courts and tribunals must take into account its relevant sections. Departure from it without good reason may be difficult to defend.

How does the Code apply to universities?

Part 6 of the Equality Act applies to higher and further education providers regarding their students, but the Code does not cover this part.

Universities often carry out activities under Part 3 of the Act, which relates to services and public functions. Examples include:

• Public lectures, ticketed events and short courses.
• Alumni services and sports centre memberships for the public.
• External welfare or clinical provision.
• Public-facing online booking systems.

Biological sex and trans people

As confirmed by the For Women Scotland case, single-sex and separate-sex services may lawfully restrict access based on sex if it is a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim.

Providers must consider the impact on trans people in their proportionality assessment. Denying trans people any accessible provision will rarely meet the proportionality standard and could lead to a gender reassignment discrimination claim.

The Code advises that institutions shouldn't require individuals to prove their sex before using bathrooms. Instead, policies, environments and communications should align with legal requirements, and suitable alternatives should be provided.

Sport

The Code explains that competitive sporting events can lawfully restrict participation based on sex for fairness and safety. Organisers must consider the impact on trans individuals. Universities and students’ unions should ensure eligibility rules are clear and legally compliant, and provide practical guidance to those making eligibility decisions, such as student volunteers.

What should universities do now?

• Identify your Part 3 and Part 7 footprint by mapping which areas provide services to the public or non-students and which are associations, to help prioritise and assign responsibility.
• Audit all single-sex and separate-sex facilities, recording the legitimate aim, relied-upon condition and proportionality, and ensure gender-neutral or individual-use alternatives exist.
• Respond in a structured and proportionate way – avoid rushed decisions or unnecessary delays. Document your approach as expected by the Code.
• Review association arrangements, including membership criteria, eligibility rules, and governance with students’ unions and societies, ensuring compliance with the Code’s framework.
• Provide targeted training, communicate equality-of-access policies, monitor effectiveness, and maintain accessible complaints procedures. Front-line teams require practical guidance for handling sensitive situations.

Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson, Chair of the EHRC, noted that the aim of the Code is to “strengthen” understanding of the law and how it applies across a range of day-to-day scenarios so that all are treated with dignity and respect, in line with the Equality Act.

The Code doesn't resolve all difficult questions – there will be situations where different rights genuinely compete, and where considered judgment is required rather than a formula. However, it does provide a framework for navigating those difficult questions. 

Institutions that engage with the Code carefully, document their reasoning and treat all members of their community with dignity are best placed (both legally and reputationally) to deal with any challenges ahead. If you'd like advice on the implications of the new Code, contact our governance in higher education team, we’re happy to help.