The education watchdog verdict that led to this University of Sussex The record fine of £585,000 should be quashed as “illegal”, “unreasonable” and “procedurally unfair”.
In a judicial review hearing before the High Court in London on Tuesday, the university said it faced “severe” consequences as a result. A key decision last March Through England’s higher education regulator, the Office for Students (OfS).
“The impact of the fine and the OfS’s conclusions threatens to have a significant financial impact on the university’s reputation,” said Chris Butler KC for the university in written submissions to the hearing.
“This case is of public importance,” he said. “It is about the scope of OfS powers, the institutional autonomy of universities to promote civility and tolerance on campus and the reputation of one of the leading universities in this country.”
The OfS ruling against Sussex followed a three-and-a-half-year investigation over concerns of student protests targeting philosophy professor Kathleen Stock at the university over her views on gender identity and transgender rights.
The court was told the OfS did not have jurisdiction to investigate the treatment of Stock, who resigned from Sussex in 2021 for what she called a “medieval experience” of campus boycotts and protests.
The regulator focused on the wording of a two-page document called the Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement, which Sussex argued was based on a template followed by many universities and updated on several occasions.
“This [the policy statement] seeks to promote fair treatment on campus of trans and non-binary members of staff and students,” according to written submissions to the court on behalf of the university.
Stock, however, raised a complaint about the 2018 policy, saying in written submissions to the court that it created a “chilling effect” and led to her suffering complaints when teaching and expressing her views about gender.
In March 2025, the OfS issued its final decision, in which it found that the policy statement constituted a breach of the public interest governance principles of freedom of speech and academic freedom.
It also found that the University of Sussex had not acted in accordance with its internal scheme of delegation when receiving policy documents, placing the university in breach of the conditions of registration with the OfS.
For these two breaches, the OfS imposed a fine of £585,000, which is under appeal at a tribunal. “The ramifications of the university’s decision are serious,” Butler said. “Especially its impact on the university’s reputation as a champion of free speech.”
The University is challenging the OFS verdict on several grounds. One of these argued that the trans and non-binary equality policy statement at the center of the OfS case was not a governing document of the university and therefore not subject to OfS registration conditions.
It also argued that the university’s internal scheme of delegation – the subject of the second breach – was part of its internal laws and was outside the OfS’s jurisdiction. Lawyers for the university also argued that the OfS decision was “procedurally unfair” and that its approach was “unreasonable in some respects”.
In written submissions on behalf of the OfS, Monica Cars-Frisk argued that all of KC University’s challenges should be dismissed. “OFS has jurisdiction to consider all relevant matters; it has conducted a careful and detailed investigation, correctly interpreting the relevant regulatory circumstances and the Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement.”
The hearing before Mrs Justice Leaven is due to conclude on Thursday, with a written judgment expected at a later date.
