Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 13

[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

Thread 10 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553754-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-10

Thread 11 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4555145-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-11

Thread 12 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4555687-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-12

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)
Marc Willers - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Stephen Clark - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Liz Davies - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Katherine McGahy - Bar Council Ethics Committee's VC (24 May)
Tom Wainwright - Barrister at GCC (24 May)
Colin Cook - clerk at GCC (24 May
David Renton - barrister at GCC (20 May, to concluded on 25th May)
David de Menezes - GCC, Head of Marketing

To come:

Michelle Brewer - barrister at GCC at time, now left and a judge.
Kathryn Cronin - barrister at GCC
Stephanie Harrison - joint head of chambers

What a bunch of incompetent bullies all these people at GCC look.

Lead by donkeys.

Talk about trashing reputation? Jesus.

🤣

This is an excellent email. Neatly captures the whole issue.

malloo · Today 13:07

'So is it just stonewall'? Boom

Really pleased to see this spelled out. Don't know how others feel but I'm a bit concerned that while all this has made GCC look bad, there hasn't been much to pin it on Stonewall's influence? Worried that they will slither out of this. But I have only seen bits of it and didn't see the Stonewall witnesses being questioned.

My take is that Stonewall don't have a duty of care to AB at all, but they have been made part of the claim because GCCs position is Stonewall's position and Stonewall affect the way lots at GCC and on twitter (fail to) think. Also if Stonewall weren't part of the claim then maybe it would be much harder to persuade Tribunal to consider Stonewall's position (and get Kirrin in the room proving the extreme stupidity and bigotry of Stonewall and their fanboys).

My take is that GCC might be found at fault, but not Stonewall... GCC are effectively landed with the whole bill on the basis that what they did was wrong. GCC could then, in theory and later on, sue Stonewall for leading them into the position that they broke the law. It would of course look bad - imagine saying "I am a barrister who trusted the organization which doesn't believe in male and female bodies - employ me, I'm really clever!"

Surely no-one can possibly think that their org. should listen to Stonewall after this and Maya?

Ah thank you.
I did hear EJ talking about losing days but was in a work meeting 😬 at the time so didn't catch that bit.
I will keep 20 June free then!
Will there be anything happening on Friday?

Brilliant quote 😂

I'm going over to TT to catch up with what I missed, but it sounded like a real East Enders finish.

I've gone through all my tabs, deleted loads so I can see them all and there's no Riders on the Storm anywhere. Spooky. Thing is, that track starts with rain & thunder, so when it began I thought we were all hearing the weather from Ben's luxury shed, like the hailstorm yesterday. It's only when the actual music started that I realised what it was & that we weren't going to get, "I'm sorry, Madam, it's belting down here & I can't hear Mr deM."

I think the case against SW has been strengthened by DDM's testimony.
But even if the case is not proven AB has managed to get them into the witness box and scrutinised publicly in a way that hasn't happened before.

You've overachieved for today. Relax now.

I was thinking about the ten part Netflix series last night.

I have an idea that it would be one of those flashback type series. That way we would get to follow Allison through her life story as it intersects with the current battle.

Maybe with the story being narrated by the Allison character.

Ughhh I can see it so clearly in my head as if I've already watched it.

Although that might be because we kind of have watched it

Cheers! It's been a stressful few weeks with a deadline which I achieved last thing yesterday. I had planned to catch up with house admin crap today but am actually sat on my arse listening to this and really glad i can devote the attention to it that it merits.

The episode where it starts to get a bit trying in chambers should be riveting. All that football talk with a Mariah Carey song playing on the radio quietly in the background.

🤣 I think I may have to follow suit with that one.

The e mail from Alice Sullivan is fab. Apologies of its already been posted.

Sent: 30 October 2019 11:36
To: David Renton
Subject: Allison Bailey
Dear Dave,
I’m writing to protest at the treatment of your colleague, Allison Bailey, by Garden Court chambers.
Allison is a lesbian who defends the rights of gay people to define themselves as same-sex attracted. For this, she has been subjected to a co-ordinated campaign of abuse. As you must know, Garden Court have responded by subjecting her to an investigation. Campaigns of vexatious complaints to employers are a familiar tool of transactivists. The people they target are overwhelmingly women and disproportionately lesbian. By treating these vexatious complaints as valid, Garden Court is facilitating anti-lesbian, misogynistic and racist bullying.
Why is the reaction to individual women like Allison speaking out so vicious, so extreme? Because they must be made an example of, to silence the rest. Anyone who believes that, in a democracy, it matters that people are not in fear of losing their livelihoods for taking part in political debate, should be troubled by this. Anyone who claims to support women’s right to freedom of association and expression must speak out against these witch hunts.
All of us women who speak out in our own names are subjected to frightening abuse. I have had to report death threats to the police, and have been subject to sickening defamatory smears. I know many colleagues who have suffered far worse, and do not feel safe in their workplaces. Have you ever questioned why genderism relies so heavily on intimidation, threats and violence against women?
Those of us who continue to speak out, despite the cost, do so because we feel a responsibility to the many who have been silenced. As a professor, with security of employment, I have to speak for all the women who have told me they don’t dare to speak their own minds. The women of colour who can’t bring themselves to deal with the inevitable torrent of racialized abuse, the women in insecure employment (and this is the vast majority of younger colleagues of course) who cannot risk their jobs, the students who are terrified of being denounced if they express their views in class.
This debate has allowed men on the left to display their misogyny, their lesbophobia and even their racism towards black women, while feeling righteously progressive. It has allowed them to refuse to allow women’s voices to be heard. It has allowed them to avoid any evidence-based analysis of sex and sexism. The contempt for women that has been unleashed and exposed by the genderist movement is breath taking.
I would ask you to show solidarity with Allison. As her colleague, you have the opportunity to offer her support both privately and publicly, and to make your voice heard in her support within your chambers. This does not require you to agree with her, but simply to respect her right, and the right of women in general, to freedom of association, and participation in public debate.
Best wishes,
Alice

I missed this - why was Alice S. writing to Dave Renton in particular?

Anybody need a support cat for the afternoon session? The cat from the next street has just come to offer support, or maybe nick my lunch. I'm not sure

If he didn't see any abuse (as he stated he had not when he was looking through the 900 replies on Twitter) why has he not taken this matter up with Prof. Alice who specifically mentions the abuse? Surely he would have said 'abuse, what abuse?'.

It is stated in the bundle that DDM wrote to GCC Heads of Chambers stating that AB’s views were in contraditionc to GCC’s ‘human rights ethos’. (Again, note that 'women's rights' are not 'human rights', because men such as DDM do not see women as human - we are some sort of sub-human servant class).
He has to own the fact that he viewed AB's views as offensive.

Just turned on the news and heard an MP in the House of Commons saying the words "a cesspit full of arrogant entitled narcissists" and I thought they were discussing GCC there too

I think they were at university together.

Marvellous. Is IO panicking?

The camera is placed too strategically to tell.

Was amazed at how after all the obfuscation and waffling, DdM just gave straight short answers to say that he was worried about Stonewall and ONLY Stonewall. How I would love to know if he's regretting that now, or too busy fuming because now we all know he's a liar (about not having noticed any abuse to Allison) and Hochauser interrupting (Are you saying he's lying? micropause- that's exactly what I'm saying) to make Ben say it very explicitly.

The Alice Sullivan email is fantastic.

Huge cheers to Prof Alice Sullivan for that email, it is brilliant 😘

And OF COURSE David Renton ignored it! He didn't want to curtail his blatant display of misogyny cloaked in righteous progressiveness!

I think it's the lunch.