Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Appeal Tribunal hearing Thread 19

It's easy for me to say, as I'm not involved, but I think you should take legal advice. Asking for details in order to observe seemed wrong to me - you only give your details online when a retailer is going to deliver something to you, or in a formal application for a job or similar. If the ET is open to the public, then it's open to the public. If you were turning up in person, you would just go in, after being searched for weapons, I imagine. And then to publish those details by accident or design compounds the original error.
Perhaps I am blowing this out of proportion, so please feel free to correct me.

OK, final post from me this afternoon as I really do need to crack on with some work if I want to meet some deadlines and not have to work all night.

Just got the log on details, it's a Teams meeting. And it includes the instructions that "the premises from which you attend shall, for the duration of the hearing, be deemed an extension of the Courtroom of the EAT". I shall make a sign for the door.

I have googled myself using the details in the court order and I wasn't immediately identifiable from the results, so I have calmed down slightly. I didn't look up anyone else, I'm doing the equivalent of averting my eyes in a gym changing room and not looking. It's still an appalling fuck up to be so careless with sealed orders, but I understand sealed court orders can also be unsealed, so it's not really secret at all.

I also note with the standard footer/disclaimer at the bottom of the email about the it only being for the addressee etc, and includes the statement that "internet e-mail is not a secure medium". No shit.

I didn't use my real name previously. You were asked to gave a name, there were checks that it was real.

Whilst I was surprised I know my name is visible when I have logged in before and this is part of open justice.

I didn't use my name previously. I'm sure it was available to the court but I just used my initials.

I know my name is visible when I have logged in before

That's not comparable. You can choose your screen name; it doesn't come with additional identifying details such as location or occupation (I have a rare name - adding either of the other bits of info would immediately pinpoint me); and it wouldn't be visible to those who have been refused access.

I have no issue with my name being made public but I do have issue with other identifying information being given out. That, to me, is a breach of GDPR.

@MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving you are free to complain, but I’m not going to.

Whilst I was surprised I know my name is visible when I have logged in before and this is part of open justice.

Well quite.

i can understand instructions to send out the court order to the people named, i can understand instructions to contact the people who didn’t make to cut to let them know, but to mix up the two distributions is a basic admin error of a type that simply should not be made in that kind of environment.

I note the email came from an Admin Officer, which I interpret as not a particularly senior grade.

NHS ward clerks are the lowest NHS grade there is. They have to have a full understanding of confidentiality.

There’s some people not just names and general location, but occupation too.

I’ve emailed to ask why my personal data was shared.

We all should, if we’ve been named.

Has anyone received a second email yet, as there was no joining instructions on the other one?

Well I’m not happy about this at all. There’s identifying details on that order.

The more I think about this the more angry I am. Having to provide our names and addresses and email addresses was intrusive enough but to be so careless with this information is negligent at best.

Would you mind @Propertylover if I also complained about this?

@MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving
It is a lovely name. One of my favourites.

Exactly.

Has the Judge been living under a rock??
The irony of the Claimant being Allison can't also have passed him by.

Yes I feel the same. Will probably change my username after this hearing, which is a shame as I’ve grown fond of it.

@GoodHeavens99
"Don't they understand why we enjoy our anonymity??"

Don't they understand why in very many cases we NEED our anonymity??

As a matter of personal safety, not being hounded out of employment, etc.

Nope.

Do people observing in person have their names published?

That’s an absolutely appalling breach of confidentiality. Sending a sealed court order to people not party to the order?! Maybe one of the journalists or legal professionals named in this order would be interested in this fact…

i note the email came from an Admin Officer, which I interpret as not a particularly senior grade.

They wouldn't ask for all those details if you turned up in person. So why when you want to observe online?

Just to prove I have it, in case of doubt, in the reasons I can give the following random data

5. distance
6. childcare commitments
7. difficulties with travel

Blind copy, which is something.