UK Lecturer Who Called Students ‘Females’ Loses Sacking Appeal
A British university lecturer sacked for referring to his female students as “females” has run out of legal options, after an appeal court upheld his dismissal in a case that sharpens the long running debate over where academic freedom ends and workplace misconduct begins.
Russell Cherrington, a senior film studies lecturer at the University of Derby, lost his challenge before the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), which ruled that his removal did not breach the institution’s free speech obligations. The judgment closes a dispute that began in late 2023 and passed through two tiers of the tribunal system.
The matter dates to complaints by four students on the university’s Film and High End TV programme, which surfaced after the course recorded poor scores in the National Student Survey. Cherrington was suspended on 18 December 2023, and a 2024 investigation found several instances of what the university classed as gross misconduct. He was dismissed in April 2024, despite what the tribunal accepted was a previously unblemished disciplinary record.
According to the tribunal’s findings, Cherrington “only, or almost exclusively, referred to women in the class as ‘females’,” and described the lead actress in a student’s music video as “not attractive enough for the role.” He did not deny either remark, explaining that he used the term because he did not know the students’ names, and did not consider the feedback harmful.
The tribunal also heard he did not dispute telling a student, “If you had worn that nail polish back in the day, you would have been called a p**f.” He was further accused of describing a transitioning student as a “troublesome trans kid,” which he denied, and of “ableist” language after allegedly remarking that universities were “becoming a care home for people with disabilities.”
Cherrington argued his comments were shielded by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protects freedom of expression, and by his academic freedom. An employment tribunal sitting in Nottingham in March 2025 rejected that claim, ruling his unfair dismissal case “not well founded.” On appeal, Mr Justice Cavanagh held that the convention does not “as a matter of course” apply to every unfair dismissal case, adding that the lower tribunal was “plainly well aware” of the university’s duty to protect free speech. “The appeal is dismissed,” he ruled.
The case arrives amid intense scrutiny of speech on British campuses. The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 received Royal Assent in May 2023, but its rollout was paused by the Labour government in July 2024 before key provisions took effect on 1 August 2025, with a dedicated Office for Students (OfS) complaints scheme due from autumn 2026.
That regulatory drive suffered a setback this year. In March 2025, the OfS fined the University of Sussex £585,000, its largest penalty at the time, over policies linked to the departure of gender critical philosopher Kathleen Stock. On 29 April 2026, the High Court quashed the fine in University of Sussex v Office for Students, with Mrs Justice Lieven finding the regulator had approached the matter with “a closed mind” and acted with bias.
Taken together, the rulings underline how unsettled the terrain remains. While regulators face limits when policing institutional policy, the Cherrington decision signals that individual staff conduct judged discriminatory can still justify dismissal, even where a worker invokes free expression. The EAT stressed that its finding turned on established unfair dismissal principles rather than a blanket human rights guarantee.