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

This would be more convincing if GC's didn't use it themselves all the time.

Yep started about 9.40am

That's reclaiming a slur. You know, like "queer"?

I'm hoping the Judge will put 'in terms' in her judgment that TERF is a slur and then we'll have legal precedent to point to.
We won't, will we, because this is just an ET not an Appeal tribunal so it doesn't set legal precedent? (I don't like to think how much gardening will be required if this goes to appeal, but I'll help if need be.)

We also have this from Mr Justice Knowles, from Harry Miller's hearing in 2019.

I understand that ‘TERF’ is an acronym for ‘trans-exclusionary radical feminist’. It is
used to describe feminists who express ideas that other feminists consider transphobic,
such as the claim that trans women are not women, opposition to transgender rights and
exclusion of trans women from women's spaces and organisations. It can be a pejorative
term.

Yellobus, all marginalised communities reclaim terms that are used to abuse them. See for example 'dyke'.

AH no. 8

I've lost count with the interruptions already. 🤷‍♀️

Mr Cooper does have a rather good Paddington Bear stare though

MW is arguing that it was reasonable for GCC to take the tweets as representing reputational damage to GCC Gabcsika. He's selecting ones that are directed more to GCC than specifically about AB.

More bundle problems

MW seems to be complaining that AB caused GC reputational damage. Isnt that an own goal? BC is saying that it is all based on her being (falsely) described as transphobic.

More bundle problems

If his argument is that GCC would have responded in the same way to any reputational threat, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the case against the person in question, they’re basically declaring themselves to be mercenaries, not people who ‘do right, fear no-one’.

Oh dear lord. What a shit show

More bundle delays

Perhaps @YelloBusyou can take your argument to Marc Willers QC from Garden Court Chambers who himself is saying that TERF is a slur. You might not like it but the legal profession are beginning to see that, in the terms that TERF is used by trans activists, it is a slur.

Or indeed the 'n' word

IANAL person but my understanding is there are limited grounds you can appeal on such as points of law. The difficulty is if a second ET is required.

Kai's profile says he's into Dick and Dom. More Dick than Dom apparently.

BC asks if that's a reputable profile.

MW says I don't know.

Another misgendering- the twitter profile in question gives they/them

BC: Let me spell out the relevance then, if Mr H doesn't follow.

Scathing!

Let me spell it out if AH doesn't follow... 😆

AH interrupting again. And yes, I think it's questionable that there is any reputational risk from challenge from mad twitter accounts which don't even appear to be in the U.K.

3 witnesses today so 2 more after MW