Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Mermaids vs LGB Alliance and Charity Commissioner - First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Thread 4

615 replies

nauticant · 07/11/2022 12:40

UPDATE: a transcript of the proceedings has been published and can be found here: lgballiance.org.uk/tribunal-transcript/

The Tribunal started on 9 September, witness testimony was heard from 12 to 15 September, and then, following a break, closing submissions are taking place on 7 and 8 November.

[This paragraph is probaby now redundant] To obtain access to view the proceedings, send a request email to [email protected] about case CA/2021/0013 - Mermaids vs Charity Commissioner and LGB Alliance and ask for permission to join. You then have to provide certain information and agree to a judge's direction in order to be able to join.

There is also live tweeting from www.twitter.com/tribunaltweets

Abbreviations:

J or judge: Presiding Judge, Judge Lynn Griffin
AJ or Judge: Assisted by Judge Joe Neville
MG: Mermaids counsel is Michael Gibbon KC
KM: LGB Alliance counsel is Karon Monaghan KC
AR: Karon is assisted by Akua Reindorf
IS: Charity Commission counsel is Iain Steele

(Also the witnesses, PR: Paul Roberts, JN: John Nicolson. BB: Belinda Bell, BJ: Beverley Jackson, KH: Kate Harris, and EG: Eileen Gallagher.)

Thread 1: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4629679-mermaids-versus-lgb-alliance-in-court-today
Thread 2: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4632780-mermaids-vs-lgb-alliance-and-charity-commissioner-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chameber-thread-2
Thread 3: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4633653-mermaids-vs-lgb-alliance-and-charity-commissioner-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chamber-thread-3?page=31&reply=121335177
Thread 4: ongoing

Witnesses for the applicant (Mermaids):

Paul Roberts - CEO of LGBT Consortium (12 September)
John Nicolson MP - Deputy Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Global LGBT+ Rights (13 September)
Dr Belinda Bell - Chair of trustees of Mermaids (13 September)

Witnesses for the respondent (LGB Alliance):

Beverley Jackson - Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance (13-14 September)
Kate Harris - Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance (14-15 September)
Eileen Gallagher OBE - Chair of trustees of LGB Alliance (15 September)

Witness Statements:

Paul Roberts: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Paul-Roberts-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
John Nicolson MP - www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/John-Nicolson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Dr Belinda Bell: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Belinda-Bell-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Beverley Jackson: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Bev-Jackson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits-1.pdf
Kate Harris: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Kate-Harris-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Eileen Gallagher (two statements): www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Second-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf

Submissions:

www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Volume-4-Submissions-CA.2021.0013.pdf

(Header format follows the gold standard established by @ickky)

post updated by MNHQ at OP's request in order to include the most up to date information.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
chilling19 · 08/11/2022 10:50

Getting very stern here 👍

Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:50

This gives KM the chance to read out some of Mermaids views and in doing so is making them sound like complete nutters, and incredibly intolerant and authoritarian.

OP posts:
Birdsweepsin · 08/11/2022 10:49

KM:

The terms 'Lesbian Gay and Bisexual' have a very clear meaning.

Even if its possible to countenance a broader definition - not an approach approved of by the Equality Act - in terms of a legal framework, the Eq Act is only one source

There is a clear legal meaning - makes clear it is same sex attraction

Even if 'that is contentious' - the fact it may have 2 different meanings does not mean it's ambiguous.

The way LGBA alliance interprets the terms may be different to Stonewall. Doesn't mean either of them have ambiguous objects.

Against that background (no extrinsic evidence) - even if there were an ambiguity, it could not have the effect of changing the objects.

Mermaids have sought to reconstruct - in their entirety - LGBA's objects.

Mermaids statements bear no relationship whatsoever. Complete redraft. No legal basis that permits such a redraft. (Promoting an anti-trans worldview etc)

WallaceinAnderland · 08/11/2022 10:49

Oh she is so very clear. Bet Tribunal Tweets love her

Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:48

In fact, it's Mermaids that are in the wrong because it is them trying to impose their view of LGB on the Articles of Association of another organisation, ie LGBA>

OP posts:
WallaceinAnderland · 08/11/2022 10:48

KM - MM have sought to reconstruct LBGA purposes having shied away from the idea that it's a sham.

Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:47

KM isn't saying that the world has to comply with the LGBA understanding of L G and B, but that because the LGBA has its own view, then the Articles of Association it has chosen to draft based on that view, is clear.

OP posts:
bellinisurge · 08/11/2022 10:46

@IdisagreeMrHochhauser - this 100 percent

LipbalmOrKnickers · 08/11/2022 10:46

KM: it means same-sex attraction.

How mad is it that this is having to be asked or answered!

WallaceinAnderland · 08/11/2022 10:46

Is there ambiguity around the words Lesbian, Gay and Bi

KM says no. Definition is clear under primary equality laws, the equality act says same sex attracted.

Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:45

KM: meanings of L G B people, this introduces no ambiguity, the terms have a clear meaning, see EQ 2010. To countenance a broader gender based argument does not introduce ambiguity. A clear legal meaning under Equality laws, a same-sex attraction, the fact that it may have two different meanings does not introduce ambiguity, because one charity can go with same-sex attraction if that's their view.

OP posts:
LipbalmOrKnickers · 08/11/2022 10:44

KM: to yesterday's question - lesbian, gay & bisexual have a very clear meaning.

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 08/11/2022 10:38

MM is an organisation entirely shaped by one woman's need to justify her actions. Anything that doesn't fit that need causes so much cognitive dissonance that they sound quite mad in response.

LipbalmOrKnickers · 08/11/2022 10:37

RocketPanda

Schrodingers sham.

chef's kiss!

Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:36

KM: Our objects are exclusively charitable. None have been identified which are non-charitable. We are not in Ross territory.

OP posts:
WallaceinAnderland · 08/11/2022 10:33

KM says activities after charity is established, is a matter for CC to look at. It does not mean that the charitable status no longer applies.

RocketPanda · 08/11/2022 10:32

Schrodingers sham.

I have come to the conclusion that anyone associated with MM have poor understanding of what words mean.

Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:29

KM: You should only look beyond the terms of the document, eg Articles of Association, when there is an ambiguity.

This is all very detailed stuff about interpretation of terms used in specific legal documents.

OP posts:
Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:27

One of the authorities is about a will and what was meant by "Godly persons".

OP posts:
IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 08/11/2022 10:25

More tech issues!!!

Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:24

KM putting forward another "let's be straightforward" argument, what LGBA was established to do relate to the Articles at the time of application and shouldn't be interpreted according to what has been going on since. This really does make sense, to find otherwise would open cans of worms all over.

OP posts:
Original poster
nauticant · 08/11/2022 10:22

MG had the task of making the tribunal accept things which are complicated and difficult. KM is offering the tribunal a very straightforward and simple set of arguments to accept.

This has nothing to do with abilities, I'm sure KM would also have struggled with Mermaids' case.

OP posts:
Ameanstreakamilewide · 08/11/2022 10:21

Why didn't the Clerk start letting people in earlier? 🤷🏻‍♀️ They knew this was an issue yesterday, after all.

chilling19 · 08/11/2022 10:20

In!

WallaceinAnderland · 08/11/2022 10:19

Only 15 waiting to get in now