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

Exactly

Ha! No, he's not Australian. He has Asian heritage I assume because he was given an award by the Society of Asian Lawyers.

What else did they do for her other than put her on lists? Maybe I’m failing to see what’s in front of me but I only saw them put her name on lists.

Really hate it when they reference a redacted part of the bundle.

But more opportunities is more suggestive of AB’s case being corrected rather than GCC’s. If the opportunities being presented are shorter term and commensurately less valuable, there are more likely to be more of them. Longer trials are rarer.

Now implying that Allison wasn't a team player or willing to "help the clerks"

God these GCC men are really pissed off with Allison for standing up for herself aren't they? Should have just put up, shut up and kept her head down like a good girl. 🙄

Yes, this could backfire for him. He so clearly resents her. Imagine having to work alongside someone who is so openly resentful.

It's amazing that none of them seem to know anything about twitter, yet it's where the whole thing played out ..

Yes, it proves AB's point that she was out of favour.

I’m not buying the whole twitter/social media ignorance shit at all either!
thanks to all posting. I can’t watch but I really appreciate the updates.

Did RM just state that chambers special fund also donate money to 'gender critical feminist groups'?

I thought part of the defence earlier was that Allison wasn't discrimated against due to her sex and beliefs because gender criticalism isn't a majority female led movement/belief?

BC has finished with RM. Now re-examination by AH.

Reading the tweets it kind of seems like his narrative about the billing/income has fallen apart on the cross and Allison's is coming through.

This is very good, isn't it? That was the most difficult part of Allison's case. I assume they aren't going to have multiple witnesses putting foward GCC's narrative on the billing/income. Their alternative analysis of her income was in his witness statement.

I also appreciated his usefully timed rant yesterday when he was being cross-examined about victimisation. Apparently being a barrister, even a very senior one, doesn't guarantee someone will perform well on the witness stand. These guys are making Allison look even better by comparison.

I guess it's hard for them to disguise their anger at her suing them but it would be in their interests to do so. LT struck a better tone as they did have a good relationship before. It would be better for them to focus on how they felt about Allison before she complained unless this is how they did feel.

I'm glad he's not my boss.

She can't work there after this can she? The relationships have totally broken down.

And I'm not sure Tasteful.

I think there's clearly two very different interpretations of the billing/ possible loss issue and it depends which way the tribunal decides.

Sorry if this is a dumb question - but does anyone know if the clerks will be testifying?

All these testy men,being held to account by a mere woman. What is the world coming to.

I think there are 3 clerks that should be testifying.

Sorry that should be 4.

When is the case expected to end? Are findings and judgements made public? Do employment tribunals set court precedence or create common laws?

27 May

They're trying to get the evidence done by then but have been running behind all the way through.

Do you think he's forgotten that AH is on his side here? He's equally as sharp and cross with his questions

Something I'm wondering is what if this case goes to appeal? Would another giant sum have to be raised in the face of delaying tactics and obstruction from the other side? Would an appeal also last multiple weeks?

It's so insane everything Allison has had to go through to get this far, and it only just occurred to me that she might have to do it all again.

The hearing is expected to end by the 27th May.

The judgement can take weeks or months to be published. (Maya's still isn't known.)

First tier employment tribunals don't set legal precedents, no. But they can be appealed by either side under certain circumstances.