Gender identity: A case commentary on G iggle v Tickle and related issues

Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd v Tickle (‘ Giggle’ ) is an appellate decision of the Australian Full Federal Court on the ground of gender identity under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (SDA). In upholding the decision of the primary judge, the full court rejected the appeal and allowed the cross appeal of transgender woman, Roxanne Tickle, from Tickle v Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd (‘ Tickle’ ). The court found that Ms Tickle had been subjected to direct discrimination, rather than indirect discrimination, in being refused admission to a woman-only app, and increased her damages from AUD10,000 to AUD20,000. Giggle is likely to be of particular interest to UK readers as the outcome is at odds with the decision of the UK Supreme Court in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers ( For Women Scotland ). In light of ongoing questions about the role of single-sex spaces, brief reference is also made to another recent case, Lesbian Action Group and Australian Human Rights Commission ( LAG ).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Discrimination and the Law
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291261489993
Primary Topic
Discrimination and Equality Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Gender identity: A case commentary on G iggle v Tickle and related issues

Margaret Thornton
1 links
International Journal of Discrimination and the Law
Discrimination and Equality Law
article

Gender identity: A case commentary on G iggle v Tickle and related issues

Margaret Thornton
article en

Abstract

Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd v Tickle (‘ Giggle’ ) is an appellate decision of the Australian Full Federal Court on the ground of gender identity under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (SDA). In upholding the decision of the primary judge, the full court rejected the appeal and allowed the cross appeal of transgender woman, Roxanne Tickle, from Tickle v Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd (‘ Tickle’ ). The court found that Ms Tickle had been subjected to direct discrimination, rather than indirect discrimination, in being refused admission to a woman-only app, and increased her damages from AUD10,000 to AUD20,000. Giggle is likely to be of particular interest to UK readers as the outcome is at odds with the decision of the UK Supreme Court in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers ( For Women Scotland ). In light of ongoing questions about the role of single-sex spaces, brief reference is also made to another recent case, Lesbian Action Group and Australian Human Rights Commission ( LAG ).

International Journal of Discrimination and the Law
Australian National University (AU)
Reduced inequalities, Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Discrimination and Equality Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon
Gender identity: A case commentary on G iggle v Tickle and related issues — Margaret Thornton · International Journal of Discrimination and the Law (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS