Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 6

[ickky]

The Tribunal started 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.

When joining the live tribunal please choose a non inflammatory/offensive name, everyone can see it in the chat - This is a court room, please behave accordingly.

The court chat function is there for official court purposes, not for observers, please don't use it unless you have a technical issue.

On the first page underneath where you put your screen name, select the video and mic that are not crossed out (top option), this is the courts vid and mic.
On the next page select NONE on the drop down windows for vid and mic, these are your own video and mic.

You must be muted so as to not disturb the hearing.

There is also live tweeting from

twitter.com/tribunaltweets
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 would be a better abbreviation)
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 = any one of the three panel members (EJ and two lay members)

Thread 1 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4529887-Allison-Bailey-v-Stonewall-Employment-Tribunal-hearing?

Thread 2 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4542466-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-2

Thread 3 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4545725-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-3

Thread 4 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4546945-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-4

Thread 5 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4548160-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-5

Either a witness is vulnerable or they are not - and if SK is vulnerable then this badgering isn't ok. Personally I don't like SK and really resent the effect his actions have had on women, but IO should be defending him if he's vulnerable

Just tuned back in (bloody meetings) - so is the GCC guy trying to blame the Stag for influencing Brewer?

I'm back watching Crown Court on going home from school for lunch LangificusClegasaurous.

Thanks for the third panel member info.

Even if GCC don't want to call her to the stand, does anyone know if she has to appear if the non GCC parties want to cross examine her on her evidence?

A witness statement wouldn't hold much weight if it can't be tested by the opposing counsel. So if they are relying on it it is unlikely that MB won't be available for cross examination.

I was one of the posters wondering if Michelle Brewer would be an off-stage presence in the drama but if she does appear as a witness that will be utterly compelling to watch.

My understanding (IANAL) is you can lead a witness in cross examination but not in examination in chief. I have no idea why.

How come IO doesn't interrupt AH?

But she does interrupt BC?

Can anyone remember if Ellen Mackenzie gave a witness statement for Maya's tribunal?

Just wondering if the existence of a witness statement (in this case Michelle Brewer's) means the witness can be called or not?

Is SK vulnerable? In what way?

AH's cross examination seems quite tame to me.

‘Either a witness is vulnerable or they are not - and if SK is vulnerable then this badgering isn't ok. Personally I don't like SK and really resent the effect his actions have had on women, but IO should be defending him if he's vulnerable.’

Well, there are degrees of vulnerability. I don’t know much about SK but I liked BC’s kinder approach. I’m not watching right now (errands) but if AH is using a similar tone to the one he used with AB, it’s not kind but I suspect it’s within the parameters of what the court would find acceptable.

@Signalbox I thought his adjustments were related to vulnerability but I may be wrong - we don't know what his adjustments were for. SK just doesn't really seem to know what is going on

SK and support page-turner have unbundled the bundle! It's just random piles of loose papers! Argh!
And the constant strange mouth movements are really distracting/annoying 😭

the lack of "refresh thread" tab on MN is really getting on my tits.
How is everyone else keeping these long threads updated?

Just reading the Tribunal Tweets and this thread it sounds like AH is tearing SK to pieces, weird that IO is not intervening on behalf of their witness.

Bookmark. Close. Reopen. Ad nauseum

I can still hear the ominous music.

Bookmark, then use phone refresh so not annoying for me but I'm on chrome browser on Android, as the App males me want to throw my phone at the wall

I'm on a laptop and use the browser circle arrow thingy, but yes it is a pain and also not being able to select a page to go direct to in a long thread.

Windows — Press Ctrl + F5 . If that doesn't work, hold down Ctrl and click the "Refresh" icon. Mac — Press ⌘ Command + ⇧ Shift + R . In Safari, you can also hold ⇧ Shift and click the "Refresh" icon.

I don't recall any reference to one, although my memory may be unreliable. She was frequently mentioned in evidence but by others.

I have a refresh option (Firefox)

I guess IO may not intervene as SK isn't stonewall so if he ends up getting the blame that helps her?

On phone- go to top of page and pull down.
On PC- hit F5.
As long as bookmarks are working, it's OK.

I don't get why it's important to establish on what date SK knew about LGB Alliance but it sounds like AH just provoked SK into saying something he did not want him to say (that he had contacts who might have enabled him to learn about it earlier than the launch.)