A woman in London, UK, is suing a hairdressor for $20,000 over allegedly “misrepresenting” her hair style.
According to the lawsuit, which was filed in London’s High Court, the salon has a policy of not allowing women to “dress in feminine attire”.
The suit, filed on behalf of the salon’s co-owner and a female employee, claims that the salon “has an extensive history of promoting the female form and has created a culture of feminine dress” which is “not acceptable” for a business in the city.
“The female staff members have had their hair cut, styled, and styled in a manner which is often unprofessional, indecent, and inappropriate for their gender and therefore, their rights to freedom of expression have been violated and the plaintiff seeks to enforce her right to a reasonable and just compensation for the damages suffered,” the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit, filed in the High Court of Justice, claimed that the women’s hair has been “misrepresented” as being of “feminine” or “girly” nature, and “has been styled in the fashion of an overly-feminine, overly-girlish, and ‘gir’ style”.
“In reality, the female employees have been told by the hairstylist that their hair was not ‘gorgeous’ in any way and that they could not dress in such a manner,” the complaint stated.
“A significant part of the hair on the hair of the plaintiff’s employees is styled in such an overly gyrating and overly-frothy manner that it appears as though it has been done with a sponge and a brush.”
The salon has reportedly not been paid since the complaint was filed last year.
“It is clear from the evidence that the hairstyle is not feminine, it is inappropriate for the female staff and it is not the style of a woman who is employed by a haberdasher,” the plaintiff said in the suit.
“This is a direct breach of the plaintiffs’ rights to the freedom of speech, equality and dignity.”
“The plaintiff has no alternative but to seek redress under the provisions of the Act.”
The suit has not yet been entered in the courts, but is expected to be heard by the Supreme Court.