Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 10

[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

Thread 8 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4552521-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-8

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

Allison Bailey - claimant (4-9, 11-13 May)

Witnesses for the claimant:

Dr Nicola Williams - Fair Play for Women (29 April)
Dr Judith Green - A Woman's Place (29 April)
Kate Barker - LGB Alliance (3 May)
Lisa-Marie Taylor - FiLiA (4 May)

Witnesses for the respondents:

Stephen Lue - barrister for GCC (3-4 May)
Zainab Al-Farabi - ex Stonewall (10 May)
Kirrin Medcalf - head of trans inclusion Stonewall (10 May)
Leslie Thomas - barrister at GCC (13 May)
Sanjay Sood Smith - Stonewall (16 May)
Shaan Knan - LGBT consortium - on STAG (16 May)
Rajiv Menon - joint head of chambers (16-17 May)
Maya Sikand - barrister at GCC (17-18 May)
Mia Hakl-Law - HR senior for GCC (18 May)
Judy Khan - barrister at GCC (19-20 May)
Charlie Tennent - clerk at GCC (20 May)
Luke Harvey - clerk at GCC (20 May)
Louise Hooper - Barrister at GCC (20 May)

To come?
David Renton - barrister at GCC (20 May, to continue on 25th May)
Stephanie Harrison - joint head of chambers
Michelle Brewer - barrister at GCC at time, now left and a judge.
David de Menezes - GCC, Head of Marketing

Oh no 😂

Hopefully the new link will be quick.

‘Like I wrote before, I think what happened at GCC is that a core group of trans activist hardliners seized some of the relevant control levers in GCC, people there were largely oblivious, and once chaos was unleashed, the rest of GCC were thinking: WTF is going on?’

Yes. Serious Pontius Pilate vibes now, though.

That GCC tweet looks like a direct tweet on behalf of chambers, so chambers is taking a position.

But they let the marketing team do basically what they wanted, didn’t they?

AH - 5?

AH - No.4.

Interrupt no. 5 from AH

EJ interjects and tells BC to move on.

It appears to me that Alex Sharpe can tweet out anything AS wants against women and GC ignores it but as soon as AB tweets anything pro-women, her treatment is very different

Admits that GCC Tweets were all on one side of the debate, but MW didn't understand the nature of the debate.

MW acknowledging GCC tweets on one side of the debate

Diving in to say that if you're a lawyer, RTing something you don't understand seems inadvisable. 🤔 He reads as awfully confident to dive in and bandy about "far right" in a case involving AB and an area he plausibly must understand to be controversial by virtue of this case, if nothing else.

If in doubt, say nowt.

And MW is suggesting that he didn’t understand even that there was a debate. This is interesting. It seems to be the assumption of even quite smart ‘progressive’ people that anything with the label ‘rights’ on must be uncontroversial.

And that’s ridiculous. These are barristers, people who could start a fight in a Large Hadron Collider.

I agree tabbycatstripy, at some point GCC will have become aware of what was going on and it's at that point they failed in their responsibilities. They didn't put the adults in charge and we can speculate why but it's too murky to get to the bottom of in the hearing. This is where the "how was I to know?" looks feeble.

MW - GCC ethos = do right, fear no one? Apart from Allison of course.

AH no. 6 saying he doesn't understand the question. MW says he does.

‘...the most vulnerable members of society.’

This is probably the bottom of the barrel, isn’t it? They heard ‘vulnerable’ and believed, like credulous children, that that meant all the rights claims must be reasonable.

My ears pricked up at that, too.

If I'm being generous, I could just about believe that GCC believed what they were told about who are the most vulnerable members of society, who they of course then wanted to champion.

But then didn't apply any critical thinking regarding males demanding access to female spaces and services

MW - Michelle Brewer was a member of the immigration team but I don't know how successful she was.

Ouch.

😄😃😄

He seems alright, but then men possibly get away closing their door and getting on with their work a bit more? They put most of the work of dealing with things on JK, didn’t they?

MW admits it was an open and friendly atmosphere, people popping in and out, asking for advice on points of law. This would make a mockery of Judy Khan's not seeking advice on EHRC.

Ben seems to be setting up here that there was a culture of office gossip and socialising, and helping each other out - not just football talk then?

MW says people at GC don’t really socialise due to pressure at work. Really??

Also makes a mockery of the 'we don't gossip' comment on Friday

It was all football. Fuck off