Overview

• Barristers debated whether excluding Roxanne Tickle from Giggle for Girls amounted to direct discrimination or fell under the app’s special measures defence.
• An intervening brief from the Sex Discrimination Commissioner’s office argued that the ordinary meaning of “woman” now encompasses transgender women under the act.
• Giggle for Girls’ legal team maintained that the app’s women-only restriction qualified as a lawful special measure to redress women’s historical disadvantage, claiming its founder was unaware of Tickle’s transgender status.
• Tickle’s counsel pressed that Grover’s refusal to reinstate her after a second onboarding attempt amounted to a second discriminatory act, urging an upgrade from an indirect to direct discrimination finding.
• The Full Court has reserved its ruling, with a judgment expected by February 2026, its outcome set to determine how sex and gender identity are defined under Australian anti-discrimination law.