A Christian maths teacher in England who was struck off after he misgendered a pupil has lost a UK High Court appeal against a decision to ban him from the profession.
Joshua Sutcliffe sought to challenge a May 2023 prohibition order issued after a regulator found him guilty of “unacceptable professional conduct” while working at The Cherwell School in Oxford between 2015 and 2018.
Mr Sutcliffe’s lawyers argued the order was an “unjustified interference” with his rights to freedom of speech and religion.
But the UK government said the banned teacher had failed “to distinguish between his role as a teacher and his activities as a preacher”.
In a written ruling on Thursday, Mr Justice Pepperall dismissed the appeal, concluding that Mr Sutcliffe “fails to understand or accept the harm that he caused vulnerable children in his class”.
The judge said there was “no merit” in arguments that the banned teacher’s human rights had been interfered with.
He said Mr Sutcliffe did not accept “that his right to manifest and express his religious convictions might have to be balanced against his professional duties to treat children with dignity and respect and to safeguard their wellbeing”.
After the judgment, Mr Sutcliffe claimed: “With this ruling every teacher is at risk if they share their beliefs and views in the classroom.”
A UK Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) panel previously concluded that Mr Sutcliffe did not treat a transgender student with “dignity and respect” by failing to use his “preferred pronoun” in class and while appearing on ITV’s This Morning.
It also found Mr Sutcliffe failed to safeguard pupils’ wellbeing when saying God had stopped a person from being gay because it was wrong.
The panel also concluded he did not provide a balanced view to a video played in form class about men being “not masculine enough” while at St Aloysius’ College in Islington, north London, in 2018.
The judge said in his 24-page ruling: “This case is not about a teacher who accidentally failed to follow a school’s policy of referring to a transgender pupil by the child’s chosen pronouns or even about a teacher who reconciled his religious convictions with such policy by choosing to avoid pronouns altogether and referring to the child by name.
“Rather, it is about a teacher who deliberately used female pronouns to refer to a transgender male pupil both in the classroom and then on national television in such a way that he would be “outed” without any apparent regard for a vulnerable child who was thereby caused significant distress.
“Further, it is about a teacher who told his class that homosexuality is a sin and implied that homosexuals might be cured through God without any apparent regard for the gay and lesbian children in his class and who made them feel that their teacher regarded them as worthless.”
At a hearing in London in May, Mr Sutcliffe’s lawyers argued the decision to ban him, which may be reviewed after two years, was “unsafe” and included “perverse” findings.
They told the court that there is “no legal requirement to use preferred pronouns” and that Mr Sutcliffe had a right “not to believe gender identity belief”.
The Department for Education, which accepted the TRA’s recommendation to ban Mr Sutcliffe, opposed the appeal bid, arguing it has been brought too late and had “no merit”.
Mr Sutcliffe had shown a “repeated disregard” for the well-being of pupils, the judge heard, and when appearing on national TV had “outed” a “vulnerable” student to others at the Oxford school.
The banned teacher’s “level of insight and remorse was at best limited”, with the panel being “entitled to find that there was a serious risk of the appellant repeating the same type of misconduct”, the court was told.
Mr Sutcliffe said: “I still stand by my Christian convictions that it is harmful and detrimental to affirm gender-confused children.
“This is the belief I am fighting for which is shared by not only Christians but many who do not believe in harmful transgender ideology.
“I have been a marked man ever since I dared to express my Christian beliefs in a school and tell the media about how I was punished for doing so.”
He added: “The TRA wanted me to capitulate and say that I was wrong. I have been severely punished for refusing to do so. Despite this set back, I will continue to fight for justice and to get my career back.”
