Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Unflip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 29 30

Original poster

Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Appeal Tribunal hearing Thread 19

738 replies

ickky · 26/09/2022 17:24

Allison Bailey has tweeted her intention to appeal the Stonewall decision.

twitter.com/BluskyeAllison/status/1572133035335716865

The Tribunal started on 25th April, witness testimony concluded on the 26th May. Closing arguments for council was on the 20th June.

There was also live tweeting from

twitter.com/tribunaltweets

tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/allison-bailey-vs-stonewall-and-garden

Abbreviations:

AB: Allison Bailey, claimant
BC: Ben Cooper QC, barrister for AB
SW = Stonewall Equality Limited (respondent 1)
IO = Ijeoma Omambala QC, senior counsel - barrister for SW
RW = Robin White junior counsel to SW - assisting IO
GC = Garden Court Chambers Limited (respondent 2) (GCC )
AH = Andrew Hochhauser QC, senior counsel - barrister for GC
JR = Jane Russell junior counsel to GC - assisting AH
RM= Rajiv Menon QC & SH = Stephanie Harrison QC (jointly respondent 3 along with all members of GC except AB)
EJ = Employment Judge Goodman hearing the case
Panel = Judge Goodman, Mr M. Reuby and Ms Darmas

Allison Bailey - claimant (4-9, 11-13 May)

Witnesses for the claimant:

Dr Nicola Williams - Fair Play for Women (29 April)
Dr Judith Green - A Woman's Place (29 April)
Kate Barker - LGB Alliance (3 May)
Lisa-Marie Taylor - FiLiA (4 May)

Witnesses for the respondents:

Stephen Lue - barrister for GCC (3-4 May)
Zainab Al-Farabi - ex Stonewall (10 May)
Kirrin Medcalf - head of trans inclusion Stonewall (10 May)
Leslie Thomas - barrister at GCC (13 May)
Sanjay Sood Smith - Stonewall (16 May)
Shaan Knan - LGBT consortium - on STAG (16 May)
Rajiv Menon - joint head of chambers (16-17 May)
Maya Sikand - barrister at GCC (17-18 May)
Mia Hakl-Law - HR senior for GCC (18 May)
Judy Khan - barrister at GCC (19-20 May)
Charlie Tennent - clerk at GCC (20 May)
Luke Harvey - clerk at GCC (20 May)
Louise Hooper - Barrister at GCC (20 May)
David Renton - barrister at GCC (20 May, 25 May)
Marc Willers - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Stephen Clark - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Liz Davies - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Cathryn McGahey - Bar Council Ethics Committee's VC (24 May)
Tom Wainwright - Barrister at GCC (24 May)
Colin Cook - Head clerk at GCC (24 May)
David de Menezes - GCC, Head of Marketing (25 May)
Kathryn Cronin - barrister at GCC (25 May)
Michelle Brewer - barrister at GCC at time, now left and a judge (26 May)
Stephanie Harrison - joint head of chambers (26 May)

Closing arguments for AB, GCC, and SW (20 June)

Allison Bailey's Witness Statement

allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Witness-Statement-of-Allison-Bailey.pdf
Supplementary Statement
allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/C-Supplementary-Witness-Statement.pdf
Closing Statement
allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/CLOSING-SUBMISSIONS-FINAL.pdf

The Reserved Judgement (forth one down)

www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/ms-a-bailey-v-stonewall-equality-ltd-and-others-2202172-slash-2020

OP posts:

Thread gallery

GoodHeavens99 · 15/05/2024 10:25

The clerk is hardcore!

She'll have to 'throw them out' if the observer doesn't identify themselves.

GoodHeavens99 · 15/05/2024 10:22

LipbalmOrKnickers · 15/05/2024 10:22

Yes I think it was scheduled for a day and a half.

Thank you.

LipbalmOrKnickers · 15/05/2024 10:22

Yes I think it was scheduled for a day and a half.

GoodHeavens99 · 15/05/2024 10:20

LipbalmOrKnickers · 15/05/2024 10:18

Once more unto the waiting room, dear friends...

Is it half a day today?

LipbalmOrKnickers · 15/05/2024 10:20

In now, looking hard at a crest on a wall.

GoodHeavens99 · 15/05/2024 10:19

ickky · 15/05/2024 10:16

@GoodHeavens99 yes the same link

Thank you. The Judge confused me yesterday!

LipbalmOrKnickers · 15/05/2024 10:18

Once more unto the waiting room, dear friends...

GoodHeavens99 · 15/05/2024 10:18

chilling19 · 15/05/2024 10:18

Already in

Same.

chilling19 · 15/05/2024 10:18

Already in

Original poster

ickky · 15/05/2024 10:16

@GoodHeavens99 yes the same link

OP posts:

chilling19 · 15/05/2024 10:14

'R argues that there was already an investigation before, so KM as an agent of SW did not contribute in any way to the decisions of GCC.'

But, the previous investigation found no case to answer, so the witch hunt can be directly attributed to SWs 'trust you will do the right thing' does it not?

GoodHeavens99 · 15/05/2024 10:09

Are we using the same Teams link as yesterday?

Propertylover · 15/05/2024 09:31

@SidewaysOtter that is what I thought. I also thought the judge got the arguments by the way he engaged. The question is does he agree with them.

SidewaysOtter · 15/05/2024 09:02

Propertylover · 14/05/2024 17:27

Do the legal eagles on here have a sense whose arguments are stronger?

I got the impression that Ben took the Judge through why S111 had been breached. SW’s barrister’s argument seemed to hinge around “The original Tribunal said it wasn’t so”.

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 15/05/2024 08:33

Snowypeaks · 15/05/2024 07:57

Oh, I see - because the paper is darker, it sort of quietens the visual signals?

Not exactly because I find a specific colour helps whilst others are just as bad as white so it's not the darkness per se.

Original poster

ickky · 15/05/2024 08:27

That's interesting. I can't read white writing on a black background, I get strobing, like looking at the sun.

OP posts:

Snowypeaks · 15/05/2024 07:57

Oh, I see - because the paper is darker, it sort of quietens the visual signals?

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 15/05/2024 07:01

I have a condition called visual stress which makes it hard to process bright light. I find text on white paper sometimes painful to read. Personally I don't have dyslexia but either condition can commonly co-occur with autism/ADHD etc.

borntobequiet · 15/05/2024 06:56

Snowypeaks · 15/05/2024 06:42

borntobequiet,

Does it help the brain process what the eye perceives? I don't know anything about dyslexia, either!

It’s useful to know about a condition that may affect up to 10% of the population, and has nothing to do with general intelligence.

https://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexia

Dyslexia - British Dyslexia Association

Ten percent of the population are believed to be dyslexic, but it is still often poorly understood.

https://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexia

borntobequiet · 15/05/2024 06:50

I don’t think anyone knows why it works, and some dispute that it does. It may simply reduce glare. My family member says that it makes the text clearer and more sharply defined for her, so it’s less tiring to read.

Snowypeaks · 15/05/2024 06:42

borntobequiet,

Does it help the brain process what the eye perceives? I don't know anything about dyslexia, either!

borntobequiet · 15/05/2024 06:31

Coloured paper is more likely to help with elements of dyslexia, which sometimes occurs alongside ASD - I have a family member who has both, and finds that in her case, a coloured overlay makes reading more comfortable for her, though coloured paper can help.

Snowypeaks · 15/05/2024 06:13

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 14/05/2024 22:55

Not sticking up for them particularly but we know that a huge number of trans identified people are neurodivergent and this is what all the adjustments are for. I think SK needed coloured paper - which is something I also need - and extra processing time.

That is fascinating. How does coloured paper help? I know very little about autism.

Karensalright · 14/05/2024 23:31

@Boombatty yes I agree somewhat. Ben does not challenge any findings of fact.

What he says is that the facts that the ET found, ought to have brought the ET to the conclusion that the test of S111 was met. And that the reasons they gave for SW not falling within the scope of S111 was not really properly explained, by the ET judge.

So he goes on to explain why based on what they found as fact, should have lead them to a different conclusion. Ergo an error in law.

The respondents skeleton arguments were somewhat “skeletal” in that they just said the ET judge was correct without expansion, and without taking Bens argument apart at all. So was just wishy washy and very weak IMO.

So I am with you, and feel much more confident.

I hope it goes Alisons way, and if so I cannot see that Stonewall will have any enthusiasm for a further appeal.

pronounsbundlebundle · 14/05/2024 23:21

I feel really bad for the 'support person'. Surely it's totally invalidating this persons identity to be defined only in relation to their function / service to another. What about their inner identity or their pronouns? I bet they don't self ID as a 'support'.

They weren't even given a name

Literal oppression.

Very sad to have missed this in real time.

Unflip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 29 30