Skip to main content

Events must be Accessible for Deaf People

Success for 3 Deaf Mums who took on Little Mix’s Promoters!

Three years ago, on 1st September 2017, Cate and her friends Megan and Emily went to the Little Mix event at the South of England Showground as part of a birthday treat, this turned out to be the start of an unprecedented legal battle.

Cate’s Mum Sally Reynolds, and her friends Mums, Victoria Nelson and Sarah Cassandro are Deaf, they were only able to follow part of the event, and only after issuing an application for an injunction in the County Court. The Little Mix events promoter refused to accept that British Sign Language (BSL) Interpreters were reasonably required, and when challenged with legal action threatened the families with costs liabilities of over £100,000.00.

Today 16th September 2021, Judge Avent in the Central London County Court handed down a Judgment, this criticised the behaviour of the LHG Live (the company changed its name to Live in the UK and is owned by Liz Hobbs) and found them guilty of unlawful discrimination under the Equality Act.

The Judgment makes it clear that service providers are required to provide Sign Language Interpreters for Deaf service users.

Commenting on the success of the case, Sally Reynolds said:

“We are all extremely delighted with the outcome of this legal challenge. The three of us wanted the same access to the event that everyone else had. The cost of the Interpreter was minuscule to Liz Hobbs’s team, but her response to our request was so hostile that we had no option but to ask the Court for a ruling.

Over the life of this case, Victoria, Sarah, and I, have put up with criticism, ignorance and threats from the defence legal team. Thanks to Judge Avent, we feel thoroughly vindicated for bringing legal action. We are also so pleased that Judge Avent in his Decision recognised our tenacity in seeing this legal challenge through. This was always a team effort; we never gave up in pushing for a legal outcome and we could not have achieved this without each other’s unwavering support.

We hope that this ruling will empower Deaf people who want access to services, without them having to go through lengthy discussions or seek out legal action.

We are aware of the barriers that Deaf people face on a daily basis, when trying to access services, so we recognise that achieving a positive outcome in this case provides immense benefit to the Deaf Community. Our hope was always that the trial outcome would provide a legal safety net that Deaf people may use in the years to come. The release of Judge Avent’s decision confirms that we were discriminated against and that LHG Live should have agreed to provide a BSL interpreter at the point of request.

We would like to personally thank Chris Fry our solicitor for taking on this case and Catherine Casserley our barrister for her consistent detailed approach. Our thanks also go to CrowdJustice and all of our supporters, who helped us to raise the funds needed to cover our legal costs. We thank Limping Chicken for their excellent media coverage during the trial this summer. We would also like to thank Marie Pascall from Performance Interpreting, who continues to work hard in raising BSL awareness within the entertainment industry. And last, but not least, we thank all of our amazing supporters, along with family and friends, who have travelled this journey with us over the past four years, we are immensely grateful to you all.”

Chris Fry, a disability rights lawyer acted on behalf of Sally, Victoria, and Sarah, he recently succeeded in a claim against the Government for failing to provide BSL interpreters through the Covid pandemic. Adding to Sally’s comments, Chris said:

“Being Deaf doesn’t mean you should expect second-best service. I hope that this decision will help people who use BSL as their first language and that they will see that change is possible with the right legal help and support. I would like to thank Judge Avent for his careful and important decision, Catherine Casserley for her expert, astute and caring assistance and Sally, Victoria and Sarah for giving me the opportunity to represent them.”

Gideon Feldman, Head of Programmes for the live event accessibility charity Attitude is Everything, said:

“Promoters and event organisers budget for crew, artists, sound systems and security (amongst other thing) when putting on shows, and we hope that following this case all promoters will budget for access requirements. Live music should be accessible for everyone and we urge all event organisers to seek expert advice to ensure that it is.”


Chris Fry is an award-winning disability rights lawyer who works closely with the Royal Association for Deaf people to help promote access and inclusion. He is one of the only specialist disability lawyers in the UK, his work spans the private and public law, this covers leading authorities, including the Supreme Court.

Chris runs his own private practice through Inspire Legal in Scarborough. He regularly undertakes work on a pro bono and No Win No Fee basis, subject to capacity.

Key Decisions in the Judgment

Paragraph 2:

As a matter of reality the case is concerned with an important and rather fundamental issue as to what access and, in turn, the extent of such access, deaf people might have under the Act in order to experience and participate in large open-air concerts otherwise attended by hearing people.

Acknowledgment of the status of British Sign Language (Paragraph 74):

BSL is a mainstream means of communication for a significant section of society.

No thought given to the likelihood of Deaf people attending concerts (Paragraphs 139 and 140):

Overall, the thrust of Lives’ position in relation to the support acts was that there was insufficient time to deal with the issues which arose. I reject that contention. Whilst I found it slightly surprising to learn that Live had not previously, until Ms Reynolds wrote in August 2017, been asked to provide a BSL interpreter at a concert, a considerably greater concern was the fact that Live appeared to have given no thought whatsoever to the possibility of deaf people attending one of their concerts and, therefore, to have given any consideration to what reasonable adjustments might need to be made.

They had certainly considered that disabled people would attend because, as Mr Hobbs exhibited, the diagrammatic plan for the event incorporated a disabled viewing area at the front of the stage. But I have reservations as to whether there was any real contemplation or thought given in relation to deaf people.

Ms Reynolds request was seen as a nuisance (Paragraph 143).

I find that the correspondence discloses that Live’s position was generally reticent and that they viewed Ms Reynolds request more as a nuisance than something which they should have been proactively pursuing. This culminated in the somewhat remarkable statement in the email of 9th August 2017 (see: paragraph 24 above) that no interpreter would be provided at all.

The Provision of BSL will always be more than likely a reasonable adjustment (Para 155):

Where concerts of this magnitude and size of being provided for a particular band, with or without support acts, for one night only at a specific geographic location, it seems to me generally speaking that the provision of a BSL interpreter will always be more than likely a reasonable adjustment to make or provide.

The importance of a Declaration of discrimination (Para 158):

I will exercise my discretion to grant a Declaration. In my judgment this is a remedy which is as equally important, if perhaps not more so, to the remedy of damages because there is then a public recognition of the discrimination which is taken place and a vindication of the claimants’ action. I also note that Live never apologised for their approach to this matter and a Declaration will give Ms Reynolds, Ms Nelson, and Ms Cassandro some satisfaction in that regard.

A vacuum of ignorance and understanding (Para 166):

Live sought to impose what it considered to be solutions in a rather high-handed manner and in a vacuum of ignorance and understanding as to any of the claimant’s disabilities and needs. There was no enquiry from Live at any point as to the extent and nature of their disabilities.

Subscribe in a reader

Connect with us: Facebook – Inspire Legal Group Twitter – @InspireLegal_ Instagram – inspirelegalgroup LinkedIn – Inspire Legal Group

Visit our website: