A global organisation of gay men is preparing legal action against a Brighton pub that cancelled their booking and refused to serve them after discovering they hold gender-critical beliefs, in what could become a landmark discrimination case.
The HumanGayMale (HGM) group, which has over 1,200 members worldwide, alleges the Lion & Lobster pub discriminated against them based on both their legally protected philosophical beliefs and their sexual orientation when it banned them just hours before a scheduled meeting in August.
The case comes against the backdrop of the UK Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in April 2025 that “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex, and follows a series of employment tribunal cases establishing that gender-critical beliefs – the view that biological sex is immutable and cannot be changed – are protected under equality legislation.
James Roberts, HGM’s managing director, said the group had booked a private room at the pub for what he described as a social gathering of around 40 gay men who share the belief that biological sex cannot be changed. The meeting was cancelled at the last minute after what Roberts believes was a tip-off from trans rights activists.
“Gay men are only about three per cent of the population, so it always looks like there are only women talking about this,” Roberts explained. “But I knew there were lots of gay men out there who believed in reality. It was just a question of reaching them.”
The confrontation escalated when Roberts visited the pub in person to resolve the issue. He claims the manager not only refused to reinstate the booking but also denied service to HGM members who attempted to purchase drinks at the bar, including one man who had been served at the same establishment just days earlier.
“The pub had been happy to serve him when they didn’t know he held gender-critical views, but not afterwards,” Roberts said. “I said: ‘I don’t want to have to do this, but you’ve left me with no choice, and I’m going to have to take you to court.'”
The Lion & Lobster defended its actions, stating it has a policy against accepting bookings from groups promoting “partisan political ideologies or views”. A spokesman for the pub told The Telegraph they were unaware the booking was “anything other than a social gathering” when they initially accepted it.
The pub cited social media posts by HGM warning that any activists attempting to infiltrate the meeting would be “physically ejected” and police would be called. “We acted when we became aware of the adversarial/political nature of the event, with its associated threats of physical violence,” the spokesman said.
Roberts strongly disputes this characterisation, insisting the event was “neither political nor adversarial”. He explained the social media posts were a response to calls from activists to infiltrate and photograph attendees at the meeting.
“I didn’t think any such activists would actually turn up, but I wanted them to know that we were aware they were talking about us and to discourage them from trying to come along and cause trouble,” Roberts said. “If the pub had genuine concerns about this, they could’ve raised them with me. But they didn’t.”
The case appears to have been influenced by local trans rights group Terf Watch Brighton, which posted on Instagram that “Human Gay Male tried to come to Brighton. They aren’t welcome here” – suggesting they had alerted the pub to the nature of the group.
Roberts expressed particular frustration with Brighton’s response, saying: “I was shocked but not surprised when the pub cancelled. But if it’s going to happen anywhere, it’s going to be in Brighton.”
The legal action is being led by Peter Daly, a solicitor who has represented several high-profile gender-critical cases. Legal experts suggest HGM may have strong grounds under the Equality Act 2010, which protects both sexual orientation and philosophical beliefs from discrimination.
The case follows a series of landmark rulings establishing that gender-critical beliefs are protected under UK equality law. The Employment Appeal Tribunal ruled in 2021 in Forstater v CGD Europe that beliefs about the immutability of biological sex are “worthy of respect in a democratic society” and protected under the Equality Act.
More recently, the UK Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers clarified that references to “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act refer strictly to biological sex, not gender identity. The court emphasised that both gender-critical beliefs and transgender rights are protected under different provisions of the Act.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission has stated that service providers cannot discriminate against individuals based on their protected characteristics, including philosophical beliefs. If HGM’s case succeeds, it could set a significant precedent for how businesses navigate conflicts between different protected characteristics.
Legal observers note the case raises complex questions about balancing competing rights. While the pub claims it was preventing potential conflict, HGM argues they were discriminated against for holding beliefs that UK courts have repeatedly ruled are protected by law.
The controversy highlights ongoing tensions within the LGBTQ+ community over gender identity issues. HGM represents a growing number of gay men who feel their voices have been marginalised in debates about sex and gender, with Roberts noting that public discussion has been dominated by women’s perspectives.
“It always looks like there are only women talking about this,” Roberts said, explaining the need for spaces where gay men can discuss these issues amongst themselves.
The Lion & Lobster, a Victorian pub near Brighton’s seafront, is owned by Portobello Brewery. Neither the pub nor the brewery have indicated whether they will contest the legal action, though their statement suggests they stand by their decision to cancel the booking.
Brighton has long been known for its LGBTQ+ friendly atmosphere, but the case exposes deepening divisions within the community over gender identity ideology. The city has seen several controversies over gender-critical views, with activists on both sides claiming discrimination.
The case also raises questions about the extent to which businesses can refuse service based on customers’ beliefs. While pubs have broad discretion over whom they serve, the Equality Act prohibits discrimination based on protected characteristics, including both sexual orientation and philosophical beliefs.
HGM has launched a crowdfunding campaign to support their legal action, with supporters arguing the case represents a crucial test of whether gender-critical beliefs will be protected in practice, not just in principle.
The group’s website states: “We believe that this is a clear case of unlawful discrimination based on the Equality Act 2010 protected characteristic of religion or belief. We are now taking legal action against the pub and its parent brewery.”
If the case proceeds to court, it will likely examine whether the pub’s actions constituted direct discrimination – treating HGM less favourably because of their beliefs – or whether the pub can justify its policy as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
Legal experts suggest the timing of the cancellation, just hours before the event and apparently following intervention from activists, may strengthen HGM’s case that they were specifically targeted for their beliefs rather than any genuine safety concerns.
The case could have broader implications for how venues handle bookings from groups with controversial but legally protected views, potentially affecting everything from conference centres to restaurants across the UK.
As the legal battle unfolds, it promises to further test the boundaries of equality law and the extent to which businesses must accommodate customers whose beliefs they or others may find objectionable, provided those beliefs are protected under law.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
