Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 17

[ickky]

The Tribunal started on 25th April, witness testimony concluded on the 26th May. Closing arguments for council will be on the 20th June. I don't know if the existing links and pins will work. I will email nearer the time to check.

If you would like to view online you need to send a request for access.
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 – 20th June 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

Thread 13 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556235-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-13

Thread 14 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556407-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-14

Thread 15 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556803-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-15

Thread 16 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4557036-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-16

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)
David Renton - barrister at GCC (20 May, 25 May)
Marc Willers - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Stephen Clark - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Liz Davies - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Cathryn McGahey - Bar Council Ethics Committee's VC (24 May)
Tom Wainwright - Barrister at GCC (24 May)
Colin Cook - Head clerk at GCC (24 May)
David de Menezes - GCC, Head of Marketing (25 May)
Kathryn Cronin - barrister at GCC (25 May)
Michelle Brewer - barrister at GCC at time, now left and a judge (26 May)
Stephanie Harrison - joint head of chambers (26 May)

To Come

Closing arguments for AB, GCC, and SW (20 June)

C’mon Hocky, crack on lad. I’m hungry.

Twitterstorm! Break open the biscuits.

They are chopping into BC's time a lot

Back at 1:45

Back at 13.45.

Surprised he hasn't dropped the 'Twitterstorm' rather than super-sizing it as 'virulent' given that we all actually know the numbers involved now!

what's Allison's team supposed to have done wrong?

AH seems very upset about it?

Ooh, a little bit of jibber jabber between AH and JR there...they forget that the mic is on.

Just catching up, thanks everyone

Dropped people from the litigation at the 11th hour. BC will have to explain it later.

Just posting to say thank you to everyone keeping the thread updated. I'm especially fond of the EJG cat updates

I have support ice cream.

As an interesting juxtaposition, on the 1pm news on Radio 4 there's a segment about industrial action about to be taken by the criminal bar, and includes the shocking fact that many of the criminal barristers are working for less than the national minimum wage.

Anyone know why I have to go in and out of this page to catch up? is it (a) my laptop or (b) MNHQ checks?

It's because we've lost the refresh button - which is a real pain on a thread like this

apologies - I had gathered that much but I'm unsure why AH/ GCC are so cross about it. Sounds like Allison's team letting GCC people off the hook which would usually be a good thing?

Is it that they have narrowed the focus to particular people? I though it was all or nothing due to the way chambers are set up?

As soon as you're aware of something that might mean you need to limit the scope of your case, for example by dropping it with respect to individual defendants, you're supposed to make the limitation at the earliest reasonable point to save the other side from incurring costs and having defendants hanging on worrying when they could be let off the hook earlier.

Agree. I'm really annoyed about not having a refresh button.

Hi does anyone know when the case is resuming please?

It resumes at 13.45 Appalonia.

I just dropped my support chocolate ice cream on my pale pink jumpsuit but DH isn't here to help me take it off to put it in the wash. I've sponged it as best as I can but I bet it'll fucking stain.

Completely irrelevant to thread but I wanted to warn other people of the dangers of support ice cream Fucking ice cream, I should have stuck to biscuits.

I had to jumpstart a laptop from circa 2005, but I finally got in!! And … they decided to have a break 😩

I really don't think AH's argument that the likes of Michelle Brewer, now a judge, and the most junior of clerks who moved chambers have suffered because of AB's temerity to seek legal redress will carry much weight. So what? She's entitled to bring a claim. It's not malicious or misconceived. The respondents had a long record of resisting/withholding disclosure. In another forum I suppose they might seek to get a costs order but that's got no legs here. I think EJG will give the argument the attention it deserves.

Question - why is it a criminal offence to record the hearing?

Surely people are taking notes anyway, and it's not being done 'in camera' - so what's the reasoning behind it?

Have we been let in? I'm in waiting room

I'm not back in yet. Everyone else?