Council settles judicial review over decision to ban gender-critical campaigners

The council said it "apologises unreservedly" to Dr Phoebe Beedell and Wendy Stephenson, who were told in November 2025 that they could not attend council meetings or City Hall for six months.

Stephenson also saw her role on the council's Independent Remuneration Panel terminated.

The city council barred the two women, who are members of Women of Wessex (WoW), after they raised questions about the local authority's trans inclusion policy at a council meeting in November.

The pair launched a judicial review challenge in December, arguing that the council had breached the principles of natural justice and that the exclusions infringed their rights under Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, among other grounds.

They also argued that the decision to remove Stephenson from the Independent Remuneration Panel was procedurally unfair because she had not been given an opportunity to make representations.

Mr Justice Kimblin granted permission for the judicial review to proceed on two grounds in July.

However, the parties have now reached a settlement, under which the judicial review proceedings will be withdrawn by consent order, subject to the parties' ability to apply to the Administrative Court in relation to the implementation or enforcement of the settlement.

Conrathe Gardner LLP, which represented the claimants, said the council had expressly acknowledged in the settlement that lawful gender-critical beliefs are protected beliefs in law.

The firm added that the council had undertaken that the lawful expression of those beliefs would not, of itself, be treated as misconduct, harassment, intimidation, disruption or grounds for exclusion.

In a statement issued on Friday, Bristol accepted that the process followed before the decisions to exclude the two women was "inadequate".

It said: "Bristol City Council recognises the importance of public participation in local democracy and the right of members of the public to express lawful views, including views on matters of public controversy, when engaging with Council meetings and public forum processes, provided the expression of such views does not amount to discrimination, harassment or victimisation as defined in the Equality Act 2010, directed against any group or individuals."

The council said a "proportionate" investigation should have been conducted before the exclusions were imposed, and that Dr Beedell and Stephenson should have been informed of the substance of the allegations against them.

They should also have been provided with the evidence, or a summary of the evidence, relied upon by the council and given a meaningful opportunity to respond, the statement said.

The council further confirmed that it does not maintain, "and will not repeat or rely upon", allegations that Dr Beedell or Stephenson acted in a threatening, abusive, disorderly or intimidating manner towards councillors on 4 November 2025.

As part of the settlement, Bristol has revised its Trans Inclusion and Gender Identity Policy to state: "The Human Rights Act 1998 has Articles which protect freedom of belief and freedom of expression, and people who do hold gender critical beliefs are protected from discrimination by the Equality Act 2010.

"When responding to a manifestation of a protected belief, the Council will act lawfully and proportionately, taking into account the need to protect the rights and freedoms of all involved."

The council has also rescinded the six-month exclusions and confirmed that the decisions will not be relied upon in future as findings of misconduct.

The statement added: "Ms Stephenson’s removal from the Independent Remuneration Panel did not constitute or follow from an adverse finding about her integrity, objectivity, ability to comply with public standards or suitability for future civic roles."

The council's monitoring officer will introduce an outline procedure for future cases in which restrictions on participation in the council's democratic processes are being considered.

The procedure will recognise the importance of informing individuals of the substance of allegations against them, providing a summary of the evidence and giving them a reasonable opportunity to respond.

Concluding its statement, the council said: "The Council apologises unreservedly to Ms Stephenson and Dr Beedell for the distress and any reputational harm caused."

The city council has agreed to pay 70% of Dr Beedell and Ms Stephenson’s legal costs, according to Conrathe Gardner.

Commenting on the settlement, Dr Phoebe Beedell said: "I am delighted that the allegations against us have been withdrawn. But the legacy of this case is wider than Wendy and me. Whatever their views, members of the public must be able to scrutinise policy, question elected representatives and disagree with the current dogma without fear that they will be vilified and shut out. Like everyone else, Councils and councillors everywhere must obey the law. They must let women speak.”

Wendy Stephenson meanwhile said: "Our legal action has resulted in the Council recognising both the protection given to lawful gender-critical beliefs and the need for a much fairer process before anyone can be excluded from democratic participation.

"After what has been a long and difficult dispute, I hope this settlement draws a line under what happened to us. More importantly, I hope it makes City Hall a place where difficult questions can be debated rather than closed down, and where councillors and members of the public can disagree without lawful dissent being treated as wrongdoing.”