BSB says posts formed part of wider public debate on sex and gender identity and did not meet threshold for harassment under professional rules
The Bar Standards Board has rejected a complaint brought by the Good Law Project on behalf of a trans woman concerning social-media posts by barrister Sarah Phillimore, concluding that the material did not amount to professional misconduct and fell within the protection of freedom of expression.
The complaint alleged that Ms Phillimore had repeatedly “deadnamed” and misgendered the complainant across multiple online posts. According to the Good Law Project, the complaint followed more than 50 posts referring to the individual, some of which used derogatory language and shared photographs. The organisation said the complainant later attempted suicide, citing GP records as evidence of the impact of the campaign.
However, the BSB concluded that the conduct did not meet the threshold for harassment under the BSB Handbook. In its decision letter, the regulator said the barrister had not singled out the complainant for “cruel treatment” and that, even when considered cumulatively, the posts did not amount to harassment engaging Core Duty 5.
The regulator further stated that, given the “heightened background tension between the competing rights of the two individuals involved”, it would not be proportionate to investigate the matter even if the harassment threshold had been met. It said the comments formed part of wider public debate about sex and gender identity and therefore attracted strong protection under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The BSB also considered whether the posts risked undermining public trust and confidence in the profession but concluded there was insufficient basis to proceed with disciplinary action.
The Good Law Project criticised the decision, saying it had brought the complaint after taking advice from counsel, including a King’s Counsel, and maintained that the conduct amounted to harassment. It said it would ask the regulator to refer its decision to an independent reviewer and, if necessary, pursue judicial review proceedings.
The organisation said the complaint formed part of a wider campaign addressing the treatment of trans individuals online and argued that regulators should take stronger action where lawyers’ public conduct risks harm to vulnerable people.
The decision reflects a continuing pattern in which the BSB has relied on Article 10 protections when assessing complaints arising from barristers’ commentary on gender-identity issues, particularly where statements are made in the context of ongoing legal and political debate.