The University of Sussex has claimed that regulator the Office for Students had no authority to levy a £585,000 fine against it over the Professor Kathleen Stock freedom of speech case, and is arguing for it to be overturned in the High Court.
After spending three years investigating the university following Stock’s resignation, the OfS announced the fine last March. It only gained the power to fine institutions in January 2025.
The philosophy professor, who rejects accusations that she is transphobic, faced protests calling for her sacking on the university campus after she published a book questioning whether gender identity was more “socially significant” than biological sex. She resigned after saying she felt pressured to self-censor her work.
The OfS said the university’s policy statement on trans and non-binary equality, including a requirement to “positively represent trans people”, could lead to staff and students preventing themselves from voicing opposing views.
But university lawyers this week told a hearing in London that while it had “not taken any side” in the gender debate, the OfS decision should be quashed as it was “procedurally unfair” and the watchdog’s approach was “unreasonable”.
Chris Buttler KC, for the university, said the case concerned the “institutional autonomy of universities to foster civility and tolerance on campus”.
“The consequence of the decision for the university has been severe, particularly its impact on the university’s reputation as a bastion of free speech,” he said.
At its heart, the issue concerns the university’s policy statement of trans and non-binary equality, adopted in 2018. It was based on a widely used template from Advance HE, the higher education charity, which seeks to promote fair treatment of trans and non-binary staff and students.
The OfS said the policy created a “chilling effect” on freedom of speech, potentially leading to self-censorship among students and staff across campus.
However, Buttler argued that the policy was not a “governing document” that would be subjected to registration conditions, and on that basis, the regulator had no power to impose the fine.
He said the watchdog was only permitted to scrutinise “governing documents” of an institution under the Higher Education and Research Act 2017. Buttler also said the investigation was unfair because of bias and predetermination. He pointed out that the OfS did not consider “remedial action” taken by the university and “singled out the university for punishment”.
The University of Sussex was the first higher education institution to be handed a fine for free speech. The university was given a significant discount because it was the first of its kind, the OfS said. It could have been asked to pay more than £3 million in penalties.
Monica Carss-Frisk KC, for the OfS, said Stock’s complaint said the policy “contributed to an overall atmosphere in which harassment against her and others critical of gender-identity ideology is seen as acceptable”.
She said: “None of the matters upon which the university relies are evidence which could support a finding of real or apparent bias/predetermination.”
The university has also challenged the fine at a separate tribunal, though counsel told the court this would proceed only if the High Court challenge failed.
The hearing before Mrs Justice Lieven is due to conclude on Thursday, with a written judgment expected at a later date.
Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday