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.

Out of interest (IANAL) who makes up the bundles .. is it left to someone lower down the pecking order. How can it be so chaotic?

Yes it is, Molly.

I was low down on the pecking order when i used to put them together. But they had to be nigh on perfect, if there were glaring errors like that, it makes the solicitor and counsel look like a twat in the court room.

Many's the time, i sat in the office, Tippexing out (other people's balls ups) incorrect paginations. It was bloody painful.

*'Look like a twat' isn't a legal term. 😉

Aren't the expensive counsels and their juniors supposed to check these bundles before they're well into the hearing?

'Private Eye' ought to be following this, if anyone has told them.

I don’t understand how on Earth Stonewall think they can get away with witness statements and evidence being kept out of the public domain.

The idea is that they are in the public domain but only during the course of the proceedings, it's just that Stonewall and GCC want everyone to forget the evidence that was given to support their case once the proceedings are over.

Is anyone back yet? I'm still at waiting for the conference host to join.

Back.

It's all gone a bit Pit and the Pendulum.

No-one shall ever enter this room again ...

Whatever this EJ decides, she is sharp.

Yes, they are Spindle - they absolutely are.

This is what i can't get my head around. This can't possibly be the first time counsel have read them.

Best of luck brave inspiring Alison!

No change at the TT thread.

Best of luck Alison!

I'm logged on but can't find the bundle. Does anyone know where I can find it?

Damn. I won't be able to read the bundle then. It won't open on my computer.

EJ says on the practicalities, this is already a difficult bundle to manage because it doesn't conform to various directions given as to how it should be constructed. More particularly there are discrepancies between the indexes. These start small and get larger because it's so big. Therefore it might take people a long time to scroll through. That is considerable.

Respondent opposes because public access exposes some of the people referred to in the bundle to vilification and abuse and it means there's no control by the ET on the use people make of the documents. Can issue a warning and contempt proceedings but that would be hard. Could also be made available outside UK jurisdiction.

Having heard from various parties, looked for practical solutions. Offer from first respondent to re-index to match pages. Also asked whether there should be separate arrangements for the press.

Conclusion: acknowledge real difficulties with the bundle. Unsatisfactory navigating the web bundle. This could be mitigated by the provision of an additional index or reading out the document if it is short. Turn to the abuse and risk raised by the respondent. Considered that the risk of vilification is very real and it should be taken seriously. There are some people who do expose people to abuse and vilification on this topic: including death threats and various very unpleasant threats on this topic.

Then consider that there is a difference between the needs of the press and observers. A topic of real debate in society. Heightened interest in accurate and informed reporting.

Fourth point is the crowdfunding element and people have an interest in reading the materials. The tribunal doesn't give weight to this because paying for access isn't aligned with principles of justice.

Going with the risk of misuse of documents, and therefore there will be an additional index to match pagination, and some attempt to read out relevant documents.

They won't publish the bundle.

Tribunal decision on public accessibility is that there is practical measures that can help dealing with the mess of the bundle, there is a risk of vilification of people named in the evidence, some of whom won't even be witnesses, the press need to be able to report accurately, the funders are interested (this was largely rejected by the tribunal), and putting that all together the tribunal won't allow open access (that would extend beyond the end of the proceedings).

Downloadable bundle will be permitted to the press on request subject to an undertaking of how it will be used.

Based on the Dring case which was about open justice, and that the public should be able to understand the case and how the decision was made.

Ahh, the core bundle availability was as a result of a tribunal decision last week.

So no downloadable bundle.

I can't see why vilification is a good argument by the respondents as the ones vilified are the GC feminists.

Will allow this for members of the press subject to an undertaking as to the use that will be made of it. 1. That the bundle is to enable members of the press to read at leisure and ensure reporting accurate, but that cannot publish, copy, post or attach them anywhere. 2. ET permits quoting from the document if it has been put to a witness. Not to be linked or attached. 3. If journalist wanted to quote something not put to a witness, they should apply to the ET.

Ask that journalists who want to give the undertaking do so by emailing a request for access to the clerk.

I’m unable to log-in/follow, so really appreciate this thread as can check in for updates as and when. Funny how Stonewall are happy with vilification if it’s fired in the opposite direction.

the bundle sounds a mess - can’t believe that it’s just down to a junior clerk. The equivalent in my industry would have been gone over with a fine-toothed comb by senior partners.

Good luck Alison.

EJ just made clear that this restriction specifically applies to witness statements and in addition to the other documents of the whole bundle.

But the witness statements will be made available to the public as the witnesses are sworn in - available while the ET is in session.

No downloadable bundle. Possibility of vilification (Judge has seen images of nooses and read death threats) is too high to allow public disclosure.

So although the majority of threats are made by TRAs against GC women (see JKR's impressive collection of death threats as an example) women can't be allowed to see all that's been going on behind the scenes at Stonewall.

My guess is that now IO and AH will take Allison slowly through her witness statement for several days, leaving BC with very little time to question the GCC and Stonewall witnesses.

The witness statements can be reproduced once they have been read, I think.

I can't see why vilification is a good argument by the respondents as the ones vilified are the GC feminists

The examples given by EJ Goodman seem to make that quite clear.