Allison Bailey to sue Stonewall -thread 2

[OvaHere]

Previous thread www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3950877-Allison-Bailey-to-sue-Stonewall

Allison's website allisonbailey.co.uk

Statement

First and foremost, I hope that my legal action will bring me justice. I also hope that it can stop Stonewall from policing free speech via its Diversity Champions scheme.

Stonewall have signed up many companies, public bodies, voluntary sector organisations and government departments to their manifesto and their value system regarding trans rights. What is called Stonewall Law. Without most of the public realising it, a large swathe of British employers have signed up to the Stonewall value system. It has done this by trying to silence and vilify women like me who have genuine concerns about how its approach to trans inclusivity conflicts with the protections, safety and dignity of women, girls, children and LGB people.

We cannot achieve a just outcome for everyone while Stonewall are free to threaten women like me with the loss of our livelihoods and reputations. Stonewall must be held to account. I intend to do just that.

Judge says there is a service relationship-the champion scheme!

LGB Alliance
@ALLIANCELGB
·
1m
Replying to
@ALLIANCELGB
The claim against SW. It did try to persuade GCC to take action against claimant because of her beliefs. The word “induce” is apt. Claim could succeed. White’s suggestion that service relationship doesn’t suffice to reach section 122.

Judge has said it wouldn't be in the interests of justice to not allow the case to be heard.

Ova, thank you for this!

A first win can be chalked up if this hearing, and specifically what Stonewall were up to, gets properly covered in the mainstream media.

@yourhairiswinterfire

Judge says there is a service relationship-the champion scheme!

This is very very important.

LGB Alliance
@ALLIANCELGB
·
1m
Final hearing is set for a date in June.

Well done Ova. Can I give a little well done shout out to Tanya at SSAUK who has been live tweeting for the last two days. I'm sure we would all buy her a gin if we were able to meet up in person. Not sure who was tweeting for LGBA but its really hard to distill what is being said in lawyer language.

@2fallsagain

Judge has said it wouldn't be in the interests of justice to not allow the case to be heard.

Yay! I was quite worried for a time there.

Yes absolutely well done for those live tweeters. I couldn't do it coherently. Copying and pasting to MN is taxing enough.

Yes me too!

Re disclosure

LGB Alliance
@ALLIANCELGB
·
2m
Judge: wants to set deadline for disclosure. Wants to avoid further disputes. Cooper needs instruction to determine precise mechanism of liaising. He says neither he nor Johnston have instruction te precise position on disclosure.
1
4
10

LGB Alliance
@ALLIANCELGB
·
31s
Cooper would like to ask GCC to search its servers for the search term SW but he can appreciate GCC might not like it. He suggests a date needs to set to agree on disclosure.

Had a squiz at some of the tweets and was particularly struck by the point that Ms White seemed to be driving at- that Stonewall isn’t in a position to influence anyone, they just don’t have that kind of clout so they couldn’t possibly have influenced or attempted to induce GCC to act.

I have questions!

Are stonewall not a lobbying group whose literal mission is to influence people and organisations to change their beliefs, actions and behaviour?

And don’t they receive public funding to do just this?

So which is it, Stonewall- would you like us to believe you’re incompetent or not?

LGB Alliance
@ALLIANCELGB
·
36s
For instance order to disclose might be er by invoking GDPR. Third parties might be added. Cooper seeking to avoid any further loss of time through disputes do wants to keep to June. Set deadlines for gathering material for bundle. White says specificity of names is needed.

LGB Alliance
@ALLIANCELGB
·
14s
Especially in relation to SW and collusion White says individuals must be specified. Dates needed for particularisation, disclosure. Cooper says naming must follow disclosure.

LGB Alliance
@ALLIANCELGB
·
19s
Replying to
@ALLIANCELGB
Judge: individuals both from SW and GCCwho are said to have victimized claimant and operated PCPs through collusion will need to be named.

This is very very important.

Yes, definitely. The media need to be joining some dots, the recent case by a teenager against the CPS for letting themselves be influenced by Stonewall that was not allowed to proceed because the judge said that the champion scheme was just about "diversity training"

@OvaHere

LGB Alliance *@ALLIANCELGB* · 19s Replying to *@ALLIANCELGB* Judge: individuals both from SW and GCCwho are said to have victimized claimant and operated PCPs through collusion will need to be named.

Oh, awkward 😬

LGB Alliance
@ALLIANCELGB
·
16s
Replying to
@ALLIANCELGB
White and Johnston looking glum. They have nothing to add. Cooper says collusion is quite narrow in that it refers to attempts to get GCC to act. Judge: how to establish existence and specificity of PCPs.

White being infuriating. I wonder for how long the judge will allow this junior counsel to continue to do this, now that a hearing is actually going to happen.

Replying to
@ALLIANCELGB
Johnston says claimant must show under section 57 that whatever any individuals did they did on behalf of chambers.

White and Johnston looking glum. They have nothing to add.

Sorry, but

Johnson is overreaching into the June hearing now. Out of her depth?

Replying to
@SafeSchools_UK
#AllisonBailey

Judge Stout: 1st June is the beginning of the trial

Safe Schools Alliance
@SafeSchools_UK
·
55s
#AllisonBailey

RMW: We want all evidence a month before the trial to be fully prepared.