Women seeking to assert their right to single-sex spaces in the United Kingdom may face challenges in having those rights enforced, according to a former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). Baroness Falkner of Margravine, who played a key role in drafting the EHRC’s recent guidance on single-sex spaces, warned that limited funding for the commission would leave enforcement largely to individuals rather than the regulator.

The 342-page statutory code, which takes effect today, lays out how to implement last year’s Supreme Court ruling in the case of For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers. That ruling clarified that terms such as “woman,” “man,” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological sex. The guidance provides current examples to help organizations navigate compliance with the Act in respect to single-sex services.

Falkner and Akua Reindorf KC, a former EHRC commissioner involved in the guidance’s preparation, criticized certain public and private sector organizations for continuing to admit individuals to single-sex services based on self-identification rather than biological sex. They contended that many entities delayed updating their policies while awaiting the commission’s formal guidance, effectively operating unlawfully in the interim.

Some local authorities have explicitly rejected the new code. At a full council meeting last month, Lambeth Council, led by the Green Party, passed a motion opposing the implementation of the guidance. Similarly, councilors from Hackney, another Green-led borough, participated in a rally urging refusal to enforce the new rules. Additional London councils are reportedly expected to take similar positions as the guidance comes into effect.

Despite the opposition, the code carries legal weight and can be relied upon in court to justify compliance with the Equality Act. Bridget Phillipson, the women and equalities minister, has previously suggested that legal challenges related to the guidance may arise.

Falkner and Reindorf also criticized the delay in bringing the code into force. Although the draft was submitted to the government in September 2025, it was not laid before Parliament until May 2026. During this period, the government stated it was collaborating with the EHRC to finalize the guidance, but the former commissioners emphasized the EHRC’s operational independence and denied any government involvement in the commission’s drafting process.

The pair additionally accused Minister Phillipson of opposing aspects of the code during related court proceedings. Government sources, however, rejected this claim, clarifying that legal actions were directed at an interim EHRC update rather than the final code, though acknowledging some overlap in the issues addressed.

An EHRC spokesperson said the commission intends to monitor compliance with the law and will take enforcement measures when “proportionate and necessary.” A government representative welcomed the code’s enactment, stating it “provides much-needed clarity” for organizations and individuals.