Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 18

[ickky]

The Tribunal started on 25th April, witness testimony concluded on the 26th May. Closing arguments for council was on the 20th June.

There was 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 )
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 = Judge Goodman, Mr M. Reuby and Ms Darmas

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

Thread 17 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4561850-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-17

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

Allison Bailey's

Witness Statement

allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Witness-Statement-of-Allison-Bailey.pdf

Supplementary Statement

allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/C-Supplementary-Witness-Statement.pdf

Closing Statement

allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/CLOSING-SUBMISSIONS-FINAL.pdf

@ickky

Regarding the Stonewall front page, doesn't it add insult to injury by defining heterosexuality as opposite-SEX attraction?

Well it would kinda have to under the new orthodoxy as anything involving gender or a funky haircut and dye wouldn't belong under the grey heterosexual flag.

Signing in, thanks for another thread @ickky

Media reporting that the DofE have left Stonewall

DfE. DofE is when you go hiking! Alas the DofE is no longer with us.

Thanks @ickky and @TheBiologyStupid

It is good news with or without the 'o'.

It's great that Dept for Ed has left Stonewall and cited the problems with freedom of speech, but as someone mentioned on aprevious one of these threads should we not somehow seek a public inquiry into Stonewall's methods and range of influence?
They have said themselves they encourage their diversity champions to go beyond the law to see it as they would wish it to be, and this is how the law has been eroded in prisons, nhs and police forces with regards to single sex spaces and data collection on crime.

Perhaps this is the start of a crowd funder , or we need a lawyer who will take it on as a class action,I’ll be happy to get some of those Stonewall donations back in the tax payers pocket.

This, about to start on Radio 4 at 20.30, might be of interest to the thread:

What to expect when a workplace dispute ends up in court. Thousands of people lodge grievances relating to their jobs directly with their employers, and that's often where they remain. But if you think you have been unfairly dismissed, or suffered unfair discrimination on the grounds of sex, race of age, the case may end up at an employment tribunal. Dramatic cases - complete with lurid accusations and sometimes huge payouts - are regularly reported on by the media. Evan Davis asks his expert guests about what really goes on during this generally painful process, and whether anybody ever really wins at a tribunal.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0018nvt

(trigger warning: contains Evan Davis)

trigger warning: contains Evan Davis

That made me laugh. But today he was on pm talking about Halifax telling customers to leave if they don't like them promoting pronoun badges, and he sounded a bit incredulous that a bank would speak to customers like that. He sounded like he was on the non 'woke' side of the conversation for once. Maybe we have found the angle that will make the penny drop - when businesses who usually pursue profit before anything start making inexplicably bizarre business decisions.

Evan Davis can sometimes be a bit sappy (or maybe it's all part of his "Mr polite" shtick), but as a gay man he's got no skin in the game. (Of course, he replaced the excellent Eddie Mair, another gay man - that's the Beeb's diversity box ticked, then..)

Following on from the Oxford University having to disclose its communication with Stonewall under the freedom of information act. Would this have had any impact on result of Allison Bailey’s employment tribunal? Are there still things that haven’t been disclosed by GCC and Stonewall?

Also , as an aside , once Stonewall champions realise they’ve been given bad legal advice and the court cases start to come along can they sue Stonewall ?

The Maya Forstater judgement is out www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Forstater-JR-AG.pdf

Maya won but not on all points.

The unanimous judgment of the Tribunal is as follows:
1.The complaints of direct discrimination because of belief are well founded against all Respondents in respect of:
1.1 The decision not to offer the Claimant an employment contract
1.2 The decision not to renew the Claimant’s visiting fellowship.

2.The other complaints of direct discrimination because of belief are dismissed.

3.The complaint of victimisation is well founded against the First and Second Respondents in respect of the removal of the Claimant’s profile from their website.

1. The complaint of victimisation in respect of withdrawal of an offer to engage the Claimant as a consultant is dismissed.

5.The complaints of harassment and indirect discrimination (sex and belief) are dismissed. 6.Remedies for the successful complaints and any issues as to apportionment between the Respondents will be determined at a future hearing

Direct discrimination and victimisation. Brilliant.

Whilst ETs don’t set a precedent it must be positive for Alison’s case.

I don't know about all of the dismissed points, but Maya's solicitor has stated that point 5 (complaints of harrassment) was technically dismissed because it was subsumed under one of the points she won on.

Oh, what a beautiful mornin'
Oh, what a beautiful day
I've got a beautiful feelin'
Everything's goin' maya's way

What a great result for Maya. Hopefully it bodes well for Allison.

Here is the Peter Daly tweet.

#Forstater v CGD:
MF's direct discrim claims were also pleaded alternatively as harassment. MF won on direct discrim, so couldn't also win the same claims as harassment too, so harassment claims are classed as "dismissed". Don't misread that as claims not being well-founded.

Brilliant news!

Thanks @ickky - that's what I'd seen then couldn't find it again.

Cheers!

Do we have any idea when the decision on Allison's case will be? Weeks or months?

Will those of us who signed up to watch the tribunal get an email update or anything?

There is no set period for a decision to be published. Maya’s tribunal hearing ended on 7 April, with a 3 month wait for the outcome. It is anticipated Alison’s will take a similar time which would be 20 September.

I don’t believe observers will be notified the decision is published. It is down to the claimant and respondent to publish, if they choose to.

AB’s decision will take months, I reckon. The evidence base is enormous.

Does anyone recall the Alexander Pope quotation that Hochhauser frequently used, please?

I needed it today but it escapes me.