Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing

[ickky]

The Tribunal will start on 25th April at 10am. If you would like to view online you need to send a request for access as early as possible.

Send an email to

[email protected]

The subject heading of the email request should read

“MEDIA OR PUBLIC ACCESS REQUEST – Case number 2202172/2020 - Ms A Bailey – 25th April 2022.

Then ask for the pin for the online access.

You will be contacted with instructions on how to observe the hearing.

I have sent a request but haven't had anything back yet. Hopefully nearer the time.

I believe the docs are open to download and share, according to the Judge?

The link provided to the bundle in the chat provides a downloadable saveable bundle having:
Claimant's Opening Submissions
Stonewall's Opening Skeleton Argument
Garden Court's Opening Bundle
and all kinds of other stuff. A total of 321 pages.

So I'm not sure what the present argument relates to.

Great I'm in. It's so interesting how it all works isn't it.

I'm listening in whilst doing some admin.

I know its sort of unrelated but the news about Roe V Wade from the USA this morning has chilled me and I think its so important that women continue fighting every attempt to erode our rights to act and think freely.

I'm so glad there are brave women like Allison willing to do this

Someone (I assume the clerk) is going through and muting all the observers now.

It's so hard to mute mics and know whether or not you've done it once you're in. Last week I had a handy video icon with a cross through it but not this week.

Ben Cooper has mentioned 6,000 pages, so it's not the 300 pp pdf

I think the respondents don't want the bundle publicly available. So BC is quoting previous cases to demonstrate that they once again are probably using stonewall law aka bollocks.

I wonder whether BC is talking about the complete bundle of this case (is it 6500 pages or 6500 documents?) rather than the just the core documents that have been made available today for downloading and saving?

I think there are two bundles? The one shared already, 300 pp. And what Ben Cooper is discussing now, which is apparently 6,000 pp.

I know it’s tricky. I’m super-paranoid. Keep checking and double-checking that my icons are crossed out. Luckily my webcam is the sort that clicks down and stores into the top of the monitor so I definitely won’t be seen, anyway…

That would make sense DomesticatedZombie since the core bundle doesn't contain witness statements and as we've seen before, those can be fascinating.

For anyone concerned about your camera/mic settings: Just don't google tractors.

Stonewall law aka bollocks

Very good

Ah yes, Stonewall's reliance on the legal tenets of 'we don't want to' and 'because we say so' is in for a rocky ride with Ben Cooper QC.

Phwoar! www.claas.co.uk/products/combines/dominator130-2015

BC: Your bundle is shit.

Not linked, not indexed, not in chronological order.

Over 6,000 pages and it needn't be as some docs appear 7 or 8 times.

So incompetence or strategic incompetence by Stonewall.

Sounds like a total mess. Pagination all over the place. Badly put together. Illegible, and unusable, by the sound of it. BC asking how the public can follow along.

So Ben is arguing for public access in downloadable form.

Colour me shocked, ickky! 🤨

Having previously been involved in putting together bundles for planning inquiries, this might not be sleight of hand and just a frazzled junior staff member messing up the admin.

Tribunal tweets doing a sterling job:

nitter.net/tribunaltweets

It isn't incompetence, they are trying to bankrupt her by overloading with unnecessary evidence that she then has to pay lawyers to sort out. Someone did that to me once when i was investigating fraud and inadvertently sent me documents which showed the people they were claiming they had trained were in a completely different place at the same time. My Head of Legal was thrilled at informing them of this.