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

Wasn't that BC's first introduction into this madness?

I seem to remember he took a case at short notice - may have been Maya's original ET with Judge Tayler. Or have I misremembered?

That's a full time job, as it turns out, @dworky ...and earning every penny of their fees, no doubt.

Is it plausible that the reputational damage caused by GCC tweeting they were investigating her caused briefs to dry up of their own accord, independent of clerking? e.g. Solicitors or whoever knowing she was to be investigated so choosing not to request/pick her?

I'm not sure, GCC's tweets were near the end of 2019, mid October. Allison says the quality of work issues started early 2019.

I could be wrong, but I think Allison is alleging that her work took a hit because of her email at the end of 2018 objecting to the SW Diversity Champions scheme (the email that was referred to as ''dirty, transphobic laundry''.)

Am I the only disappointed that the Rowley Birkin QC defence wasn’t used

Great, thank all.

I've just missed this last 5 minutes. I'm glad he's addressing the nuts and bolts of the decrease in work.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553181-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-9

Super!

Thanks ickky

JR is now going to reexamine for 10 minutes.

Thanks @nauticant

It'll be interesting to watch the different clerks' demeanours. Charlie certainly seems straightforward.

Is it sexist to say that I don't like JR's tone? Makes me think of some of the girls I was at school with. She's re-examining and still sounds condescending.

She is shouting over BC's objection.

Oooh, drama!

JR thinks this is LA Law!

Rhetorical flourish!

JR is trying to sound calm and in control but she's actually incredibly stressed.

We need to draw a line now on the rhetorical flourishes at the end of re-examination.

JR is frantically trying to draw her emotions in having built them up. Also talking over the judge. Take a breath.

I have a huge amount of influence over who gets instructed as a more junior barrister on one of “my” cases. The solicitor will usually be guided by me because they expect me to know whose particular skills are most suitable for that case, and they also know that the working relationship is important.

But putting people forward as juniors is also subject to our professional obligations to ensure fair distribution of work opportunities. Increasingly I think it is difficult to justify putting forward one person only for any given opportunity, and I keep a paper trail of who I do put forward. It’s arguably most important to do so in this situation because it’s not funnelled through the clerks’ room, meaning that favouring or avoiding one person by another barrister is harder to monitor.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude I have that one running through my head all the time, waiting for it to appear 😂

Lunch break

A great time to start a new thread 😊

And here it is

Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 9 www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4553181-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-9

So good I'm posting it twice.

Yes, you're right about JK's background. For some reason there's something about her that reminds me of Tracey Emin, but that's probably just me.

I believe GC(C) left the SW Diversity Champions scheme during the pandemic to save money (well, like the EHRC, that's the excuse they gave...).

This!!!!