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

He seems to be saying it would breach confidentiality to send a general tweet. But not a breach of confidentiality to send it to only 7 people.

MW’s Twitter probably does his photocopying and brings him tea and jammy dodgers.

I'm really struggling to follow Tribunal Tweets on Twitter.

Yes, Twitter's recently got more annoying for people not logging in.

Using a private window may help - it may block the cookie that prompts the "log in" pop-up.

Or use this alternative front-end:

nitter.eu/tribunaltweets

(Although the fact it shows threads in normal not reverse chronological order might not be as good for following a long-running thread like this live. Not sure if you can reverse it)

Two options:

Click the log in box on Twitter and then just close the next pop up without logging in or doing anything, and you can continue reading the sign in box will randomly return and you just do the same again.

Or go to:

nitter.net/tribunaltweets

I think his refusal to answer is making him look foolish.

Is he really trying to say that he didn't understand the confidentiality clause doesn't apply to the subject of the complaint?

Are they trying to say that they think that Twitter is some private communication tool?

You would not believe how often lawyers and judges will claim that twitter when used for tweeting is a person-to-person communication tool and doesn't have a broadcast aspect.

OMG he thinks a reply is private?!

Long pauses while MW QC, erstwhile head of chambers, tries to figure out exactly what GCC's own complaints procedure actually means

Just proves how efficient women are.

I'm not a radical feminist and I have been called a TERF many times as a slur. So I can reclaim it as, yes I have gender critical views but it doesn't now mean that I am identifying a trans exclusionary radical feminist as I don't. I think this proves the point about reclaiming slurs changing their meaning.

Twitter isn’t private because anyone can see it.

I can't watch anymore today as I'm in meetings. Keep up the stellar commentary!

Now he is saying that confidentiality was only for the benefit of the person who made the complaint. Did I mishear that?

"tweeting a reply to someone is not a private message, is it?" Great question from BC

Previous witnesses (can't remember who) already admitted they knew the tweet would probably be widely disseminated.

He's a QC. It is incredible that he doesn't understand that a tweet is public.

Ok back, had to do some pesky work 😩

Tweeting that someone is under internal investigation is a huge breach of confidentiality. End of. He would have been better off holding his hands up on this one.

And this is someone who actually admits to reading it occasionally!

Is it me, or is it not a good look for a supposedly intelligent barrister to admit that he doesn’t have the « wherewithal » to access replies on Twitter?

MW - we don't need to go back to my understanding of twitter.......
someone with the wherewithal can access the replies....

Oooh and Ben just totally agreed with me.

I'm catching up on TT and it may have been covered already on this thread but I did have to laugh at BC wondering if Twitter user based in Sweden was likely to use GCC's services at any point and so whether 'reputational damage' would have any effect.

Admitted that it was not usual practice to tweet about complaints and they only did it because their reputation was being "hammered" on Twitter.