Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 8

[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

Thread 6 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4550451-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-6

Thread 7 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4551757-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-7

There was an interim version of the ETBB published in Dec '21 which shifted some of the guidance towards balancing views/rights - See the Legal Feminist blog here for more details.

Thank you, that's at least a good start! Between Maya's ET and Maria McLachlan's case it seemed something was seriously rotten for a while, it's good to see it's getting challenged.

Michelle Brewer, Louise Hooper and Stephanie Harrison of GCC were all keynote speakers at TELI's inaugural conference in 2016 (with thanks to the much missed R0wan for her forensic investigation skills):

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjflTJg-z3AhXNT8AKHaXNBIEQFnoECAwQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mumsnet.com%2FTalk%2Fwomenssrights%2F3374926-What-influence-does-TELI-have-on-government-public-services-and-charities-policies-Co-founders-include-Jess-Bradley-Tara-Hewitt-and-Michelle-Hudson&usg=AOvVaw0Ox8Uzgc-d1Bq9bDOAij-

Brewer was a trustee of Gendered Intelligence. To suggest the rest of the chambers were unaware of the debate around trans issues is absurd.

In other words, they were so open minded that their brains fell out.

Yes!

As far as a settlement goes, I can't see any chance of that, even if Allison were willing to countenance one. There are two respondents (technically three but effectively two) with different interests. Difficult to see what sort of agreement would be acceptable to both and to Allison in order to bring the whole thing to an end. And frankly, the bulk of all the costs are sunk now. Unless it looks as though the case is about to throw up a piece of extraordinarily damaging evidence that is worse than anything seen so far and which is calculated to be worse than a judgement against them (very, very unlikely), I think the respondents will soldier on to the bitter end, take their chances with the tribunal's findings and put their respective PR bods into overdrive when it's all over.

Yup - and nailed the human approach to the planet, consumerism, and plastic too!

They held this event actually at GCC

they’re lying through their teeth saying they didn’t know about the issues surrounding ABs email

They completely knew

You may not be imagining it.

I have no idea about Ben's sexuality.

Perhaps I should have put "beloved" 😁

A little like GCC being unaware of the debate or unversed in Twitter, it was a sort of eyebrow-raising to hear that an article AB had sent wasn't read as it was paywalled - in The Times. Obviously barristers are not a homogeneous group but I always thought that there are groups who read the "paper of record": politicians, political staff, and legal types.

Hertfordshire is a great shout.

😂 I hope so!

Crumbs! I forgot about the very impressive R0...whatever happened to her??

I can't manage a support weasel, but here's a honey badger channelling Allison: www.ecosia.org/images?q=emotional%20support%20honey%20badger#id=AD2329082C16A33052023E6E56E51315641DDA53

Yes - how did THAT happen?

Thank you very much for the new thread @ickky and to everyone for the insights. I haven't been able to follow along with TT today so this has been a good catch up. GCC aren't inspiring much confidence, are they?

@BoreOfWhabylon 's scream of 'what did they say about Mumsnet!!' gave me a proper giggle!

The other Ben Cooper on Twitter is a very good sport and puts me in mind of the very nice John Lewis who deals with complaining tweets about the shop with humour and grace.

Gender ideology twitter seems to be a mix of completely ignoring the case, trying to say that Allison isn't doing well (really?) or a dawning realisation that people are starting to understand the bat shittery which surrounds this subject.

There are only 28 QCs at GCC. Two of them were keynote speakers at the inaugural TELI event. One of them was a trustee of Gendered Intelligence.

In the event held at the chambers, one of them was chairing and the other was a key speaker and is also listed as GCC /TELI on the programme.

So are we supposed to believe they were too stupid to understand? Or that they've got really bad memories?

I am not for a moment suggesting they're being dishonest but is it perjury if you lie in an employment tribunal?

GCC does seem like a very big chambers. I could well imagine that you don't know the detail of everything because there's so many of them. But when you're asked to look into the detail of something you don't know that it would appear to the layperson, to move into different territory.

Thanks, I'll take it! Honey badgers are wonderful animals. There's a video of one getting a snake bite that would kill another animal, but the HB just goes to sleep for a while, then wakes up & gets on with its business.

Thanks for the new thread, will mow catch up.

I’m not sure I understand why GCC don’t just throw Stonewall under the bus here.

Surely saying ‘look we were busy with billable work, an internal crisis with our IT, a second crisis with our offices and various personal stuff. Stonewall, at the time, the go-to people for this sort of training and advice. Even the government used them and consulted with them. So we outsourced our training/knowledge on this specialised topic to what we thought were trusted experts..’ Would be a better, more understandable, position than this shit show we’re watching?

I said it was channelling Allison. (Snake bite wasn't from a viper, I'm sure.)

It is a big chambers. But there are only 28 QCs. Steph is now joint head of chambers. Michelle was a very senior barrister. There is no way that LT and JK did not/do not know.

Also their Equal Opps policy, point 2. Notice anything missing?

We recognise that in society groups of individuals are oppressed and/or disadvantaged on grounds of their race, ethnic or national origin, social class, gender, religion, sexual orientation, disability and age. We further recognise that there is acute discrimination both in the criminal justice system and the legal establishment.

It is absolutely clear that they see themselves as social justice warriors and they are absolute outraged that Allison is challenging that. That's why they are so furious.

Part time lurker, who is frankly terrified of all HR matters in the charity I hold the purse strings for. I think the term is "consciously (potentially) incompetent". We usually figure it is cheaper to invest in decent legal advice on areas we are unclear about, rather than risk the hassle and costs of a tribunal.

Sat behind GC and Stonewall there have to be some liability/prof indemnity insurers. I've instructed barristers in a few cases that made it to court in my old ££ job and they do tend to "intervene" if they can see a potential car crash emerging.

You don't want to mess with honey badgers, by the way.

Thank you for what you are all doing, by the way.

Owner of 2 "aspiring" emotional support cats, unless it is an external/important meeting. In years to come, people may wonder why so may of our doors have waist height scratches

This, this this this!

So GCC hasn’t got the legalities of the protected characteristics correct as it mentions gender not sex. Oh dear.