Tribunal Tweets - Maya is tweeting from the Kirstie Higgs' recusal hearing

[Madcats]

I really shouldn't have looked at Twitter about an hour ago, but got sucked in.

The background to the recusal (seeking to get Edward Lord OBE as one of the lay panel members) is outlined here:
christianconcern.com/ccpressreleases/kristie-higgs-employment-tribunal-to-scrutinise-role-of-anti-free-speech-lgbt-activist-in-appeal-case/

The judge is a female, Edward is non-binary

Lifting directly from 3 of the recent tweets:

"Counsel for the Attorney General interjects - discomfort at Richard o'Dair's use of he and him, when Mx Lord's pronouns are they and them.

JE - Advocates have to treat parties with respect. Advocates sometimes slip on pronouns used. As a female judge you get used to it"

"JE - I hear what is said. No difficulty in saying the "Laymember" - perhaps you could be a bit more careful with the language.

ROD - I will, but my intellectual energy should go into stating the case for my client"

"JE - yes that is why i said, i have sat here for years being referred to by male pronouns and not said a word about it. But it is a fair point."

I like to think that Maya's enjoying herself.

I had no idea this was going on Maya has the energy of a sun giant.

Intro thread:
twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1539523256092352512

Coverage thread:
twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1539543114884464641

Maya's done a great job of popping in all the tweets in evidence as screenshots.

Intro thread, take 2:
twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1539523256092352512

Coverage thread:
twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1539543114884464641

JE (Mrs Justice Jennifer Eady, President of the EAT) sounds brilliant!

That was hilarious.

It will be interesting to see what decision JE comes to - I suspect that Mx (!) Lord might well be recused.

I'm sorry I can't quite make out what's going on can anyone give me a quick summary of the background to help?

Howdo there is due to be an appeal of an employment tribunal (higgs v farmors) about a Christian woman who was sacked as a teaching assistant because of things he said about how her son's school taught about gay marriage and gender identity- seems to mainly be about gi stuff. She posted them on her own Facebook which was not public, but were screenshot.

Edward Lord is a well known they/them bearded tra much discussed here. He is supposed to be the lay member of the tribunal panel. Higgs is applying for Lord to be recused because of bias. They's refusing to go. The judge has to decide.

Longer thread

TRA on tribunal panel for school gender identity cass www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4572896-tra-on-tribunal-panel-for-school-gender-identity-cass

Wasn't Lord behind the City of London consultation on single-sex spaces, where Lord admitted IIRC that responses to the consultation from GC women were basically binned as Lord disagreed with them? I do hope this will be brought up, as it seems very clear evidence that women with these views don't get a fair hearing from Lord.

The Attorney General's Lawyer:

I think submission that he is seeking to silence radical feminists
mischaracterises his position insofar as those submissions arise from his position, that he won't allow on his twitter those views or that the LGBTQ+ is not that those views should not be expressed.

They/Their not He/His you idiot!

And didn't Lord have something to do with making the Hampstead women's pond mixed sex?

Yes he absolutely did.

Yes, that was Lord.

He isn't without form. That's for sure.

There is no way he should be on a tribunal for this person. Anyone can see that.

Reading this got me thinking about the whole fight against recusing oneself. If someone asks for you to recuse yourself for fairness isn't the most sensible thing to do to just shrug, pass the case on to someone else and pick up the next case? Arguing that you absolutely must be involved in this particular case and that you're very much not biased because of reasons kinda indicates that your interest in this case is possibly a little unbalanced.

‘If someone asks for you to recuse yourself for fairness isn't the most sensible thing to do to just shrug, pass the case on to someone else and pick up the next case?’

Yes, it’s basic courtesy.

I suspect self knowledge is not Mx Lord’s strong suit

And how do you pronounce that do we think? Mucks?

Indeed it's a big red flag

I'm also amused at Mucks(TM @BernardBlackMissesLangCleg) Lord's insistence that their tweets are in an entirely private capacity when they quite literally cite their position in Middle Temple and @ pretty much everyone they work with when complaining about naughty wrongthink from Naomi Cunningham.

Kicks back to your self knowledge point.

I was in a Teams meeting with him last year and my spidey senses were set off shudders

No because people would abuse this to try to ‘pick their judge’. Those sitting judicially need to recuse themselves if they consider they are actually biased (eg they know a person involved in the case or may have a financial interest in a case) or if a fair-minded person in possession of all the facts would consider there was a real possibility they were biased (apparent bias). The judge would have to put themselves in the shoes of that fair minded person.
it is very often the case that recusal applications fail. Of course whatever the decision there is a right to seek permission to appeal.

Of course in this case the argument seems to be that there is ample evidence that Mx Lord is actually biased - not sure if apparent bias is also being argued, might be in the alternative - and actual bias is always a more uncomfortable application for both the advocate and the judge, for obvious reasons.

you can think of the difference between the two as justice being done but also being seen to be done.

Isn't Lord a gendered title, shouldn't it by Lardy.