Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 17

1000 replies

ickky · 03/06/2022 15:32

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)

OP posts:
TessaSmith · 20/06/2022 13:48

Just now!

Gabcsika · 20/06/2022 13:48

Nope. still waiting.

LipbalmOrKnickers · 20/06/2022 13:49

in now

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/06/2022 13:49

Roseglen84 · 20/06/2022 13:47

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?

I think it's actually under an Act of Parliament so to change it would require new legislation. IANAL. Someone legal can hopefully explain why.

Appalonia · 20/06/2022 13:51

God this is like deja vu!!

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/06/2022 13:51

Twitterstorm. Bingo.

Roseglen84 · 20/06/2022 13:52

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/06/2022 13:49

I think it's actually under an Act of Parliament so to change it would require new legislation. IANAL. Someone legal can hopefully explain why.

Thanks - love the name btw 😁

I could understand for private hearings, but this is being done in public anyway, just don't really see the difference between taking notes and recording it.

dunBel · 20/06/2022 13:53

What is this "direct attack on Chambers" Hochhauser keeps going on about? Does he just mean people being a bit rude to whoever was running the Chambers twitter feed?

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/06/2022 13:57

Yeah people telling GCC off for association with a terfy barrister etc.

EmbarrassingHadrosaurus · 20/06/2022 13:58

I could understand for private hearings, but this is being done in public anyway, just don't really see the difference between taking notes and recording it.

You might not have seen it but on previous threads (16, plausibly 15) there have been overviews of the Open Justice project that argues for recordings. It very nearly happened.

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 20/06/2022 14:00

Gosh, there is something vastly ridiculous about hearing Hochauser in his slow pompous voice arguing the toss on Twitter arguments and who knew what when.

These proceedings always had the potential for bathos but I never experienced it till now - I was always quite gripped when I tuned in! Now, though... I think Hochauser has got the wrong sort of gravitas for this case; he sounds silly talking about Twitter.

nauticant · 20/06/2022 14:00

Some background on recording of proceedings, it has a long history but relevant things happened as a result of the Covid pandemic:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/7/notes/division/24/index.htm

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/7/schedule/25/enacted

Ahh, a "counsel of perfection" from AH. Not heard that in an age.

nauticant · 20/06/2022 14:03

Here's the provision which means that courtroom artists are prohibited in the UK from making sketches of their subjects in court and instead have to commit what they see to memory and draw it later outside the courtroom:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/15-16/86/section/41

LipbalmOrKnickers · 20/06/2022 14:03

It wasn't entirely unprecedented was it - I thought there was a previous complaint of anti-semitism that hadn't been dealt with in the same way?

Roseglen84 · 20/06/2022 14:05

Thanks EmbarrassingHadrosaurus and nauticant, in truth I'm just annoyed I didn't get a chance to see the Support Dog/Mother/Teddybear fiasco in all it's glory. Purely for the comedy factor.

nauticant · 20/06/2022 14:06

The ever-expanding emotional support team was indeed a joy to behold Roseglen84

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/06/2022 14:09

I think AH needs a support calculator. He may very well have dyscalculia and so am not dissing what could be a neurodivergence. I used to work with someone with dyscalculia who used to reverse figures all the time. It was always on prices for things so could cause a lot of chaos.

Pluvia · 20/06/2022 14:10

Yes, it was the high point.

I'm trying to imagine the bottomless depths of patience and attention to detail required to be a judge. How does EJG do it?

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/06/2022 14:11

Luckily AH already has a support Jane Russell

Ameanstreakamilewide · 20/06/2022 14:11

Oh, Andrew!

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/06/2022 14:12

Alexander Pope. Willing to wound but afraid to strike.

LipbalmOrKnickers · 20/06/2022 14:13

Alexander Pope - again! You're repeating yourself now Hochy...

Mmmnotsure · 20/06/2022 14:13

I've tried to log back in this pm. I show in the left hand side as observer (with microphone cut out), but all I get is a blank screen and no sound (my screen and sound are on). Anyone any idea what to do?

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/06/2022 14:13

Who was the man of a nervous disposition? Is that the vulnerable employee or KM or SK?

And was AH saying SK was an unreliable witness?

LipbalmOrKnickers · 20/06/2022 14:14

I thought it was a bit ostentatious the first time. Now I see he only has the one quote - meh. 😂

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.