Australia’s highest court has shut the door for good on a women-only app that tried to keep out a transgender woman, ending a fight that started in 2021.
Quick Take
- The High Court of Australia refused to hear a final appeal from Giggle for Girls founder Sall Grover in September 2026.
- A Federal Court judge first ruled in 2024 that the app indirectly discriminated against Roxanne Tickle and ordered $10,000 in damages.
- The Full Court later upheld the discrimination finding and doubled the payout to $20,000.
- Grover says the ruling misreads Australia’s Sex Discrimination Act and threatens women-only spaces.
- The case is the first in Australia to test 2013 legal protections against gender identity discrimination.
High Court Closes the Book on a Years-Long Fight
The High Court of Australia denied Sall Grover’s request to appeal in September 2026, ending the legal path for Giggle for Girls. The app, marketed as a women-only social network, had already lost twice in lower courts. This decision means the earlier rulings against the app now stand as final.
Roxanne Tickle first sued in 2021 after the app removed her from its platform. She argued the exclusion broke Australian anti-discrimination law. The case slowly worked its way through the court system for five years before reaching its final stop this month.
What the Courts Actually Found
In August 2024, a Federal Court judge ruled that Tickle’s claim of direct discrimination failed, but her claim of indirect discrimination succeeded. The court said the app’s rule requiring users to look like women had “a disadvantaging effect” on transgender women, even without a written policy naming trans people.
The Human Rights Commission’s Sex Discrimination Commissioner said the court found Tickle “was excluded from the app based on her appearance, and that this was discrimination on the ground of her gender identity”. In May 2026, the Full Federal Court went further, upholding the discrimination finding and raising the damages award to $20,000.
Grover Says the Courts Got It Wrong
Sall Grover rejected the rulings from the start. She said the courts misread the Sex Discrimination Act, ignored evidence, and “misconstrues the fundamental rights of women and girls, as well as the principles of single-sex spaces that are vital for their safety and dignity”. Her public defense has stayed the same through every appeal: the app was built to protect women, not to discriminate.
Australia doesn't know what a woman is.
Giggle for Girls denied appeal with Australian High Court after trans male Roxy Tickle sued over discriminationhttps://t.co/P8pmF5j4zQ
— Libby Emmons (@libbyemmons) September 11, 2026
Grover’s arguments never persuaded a court. Each ruling, from the first trial to the High Court’s refusal to hear more, sided with Tickle. Still, her statements are the clearest public counterweight to the discrimination finding, and they show the fight over single-sex spaces did not start or end with one lawsuit.
A Case That Set New Legal Ground
Legal commentary describes this as the first Australian court case to test protections against gender identity discrimination added to the law in 2013. That makes the outcome bigger than one app. It signals how courts may treat other services, from shelters to social clubs, that limit access based on sex or gender identity.
For readers on both sides of the political divide, the case raises a question that goes beyond identity politics: how much say should private platforms have over who they let in, and how far can courts go in second-guessing those choices? That tension, over private rights versus anti-discrimination law, is not going away with this ruling.
The fight over Giggle for Girls stretched across five years and three levels of court. It ends with a final legal answer, but the broader argument over women-only spaces, gender identity law, and how private apps set their own rules is likely to keep surfacing in future cases.
Sources:
humanevents.com, bbc.com, fedcourt.gov.au, equalityaustralia.org.au, gratafund.org.au
