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

I wonder if there will be a little tsunami building up even now, with people who have been bullied out of jobs etc but who felt that they didn't dare go forward because they didn't stand a chance and couldn't afford a loss?

I do hope so.

And unless they want to be homosexual.

Then we're at the lead in conversion therapy for lesbians 'learning to cope' with unwanted straight sex to benefit males who feel entitled to them.

Batshit.

However I am now enjoying the whole 'We just provide batshit advice and recommendations as one of many realities you can select from. It's on your head if you follow them."

Has this been reported anywhere apart from Personnel Today? I can't see anything on the Guardian or BBC sites.

Metcalfe was on Stonewall's Trans Advisory Committee (STAG) - Stronewall argued basically that STAG was a separate entitiy and did not represent Stonewall per se

I think there may be something in this.
Somewhere, somewhere, it would have to be shown they acted against her and her beliefs, thus she shone her torch everywhere, including to get SW's own explanations of their opposing ideology which is the rationale behind their advice to organisations.

That must've taken so much effort and mental fortitude. Well done Allison!

Very good news! Well done Allison. Enjoy a well earned rest, party, holiday, whatever!

And from Stonewall The case heard by the Employment Tribunal did not accurately reflect our intentions and our influence on organisations.

Well I'm pleased to hear it though now that we have all seen what one of Stonewall's employees actually wrote to GCC it's a bit of a stretch for us to believe that they didn't really mean it.

Well done Allison, terrific win.

As for SW they now have the stink on them. What employer or agency is going to risk being sued due to their advice? They'll jump like rats from a sinking ship.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/07/27/allison-bailey-barrister-wins-discrimination-case-against-stonewall/

The Personnel Today article has a quote from GCC saying they're considering appealing, so don't suppose there will be an apologetic statement :-/

❤Alison ❤

This was their game plan: 'It wasn't us, Gov, it was the inexperienced young'un with the support dog.'

Never act on the basis of advice from someone who can’t be sued for getting it wrong is a pretty good rule of thumb.
if only everyone followed it, it would blow quite a few organisations’ business models to smithereens

From the judgement:
The main hearing bundle was exceptionally difficult to work with. Despite the guidance on preparation of electronic bundles in CPR, the Employment Tribunals Presidential Direction,
Employment Judge Stout’s explicit directions in earlier case management hearings, and the time the case had taken to come to hearing, it seemed to have been randomly thrown together. Sections were not OCR readable. Over 600 pages of Garden Court disclosure were not in the main index but in a 13 page sub-index inserted between pages 374 and 375. Five other sub-indexes had been grafted in, but did not reach the tribunal until 18 May. Pagination from earlier bundles had not been removed, complicating the search function. Pages had been inserted sideways. Email exchanges could be 2,000 or 4,000 pages apart. There was frequent duplication of the same emails or tweets. An additional 116 pages (“section L”) did not reach the tribunal until 20 May. The supplementary bundle was added to more than once, and additions not always notified to the tribunal.

Thanks! I also see that the Spectator, Independent and our friends Pink News have reported it.

I'm just on a work break and heard - I'm just so delighted for Allison.

And it seems I called it!

"The flip side could be that the discrimination & victimisation was so egregious & blatant it's a slam dunk?

<optimistic>

😬🤞🤞🤞"

The aggravated element of the judgement :

"Such was the oppressiveness of Garden Court’s actions against her, the Tribunal awarded aggravated damages, which are only awarded where a discriminator’s actions are particularly unnecessary, high handed or oppressive."

This part of the judgement really ought to be the massive wake up call for orgs/employers who are willingly going along with the idea that women are somehow the worst sort of 'bigots' for defending our rights & boundaries. Just because Stonewall says so, doesn't make it so. And their 'word' on this isn't worth the ££££ that businesses are now having to pay out when stonewall law is what they follow.

Bloody well done Allison! You absolute shero! 🎉🎉🎉

Stonewall are just Men’s Rights Activists now, aren’t they.

Old t-shirt: 1969, Yay.
New t-shirt: We Hate Women.

Sad. Really sad for moderates.

Only wish it hadn’t been just that little bit predictable.

The Proud Trust who distribute the dice game?

This is a bad idea. Even if they win they lose, because it just drags the whole ridiculous episode back into the public eye.

Indeed.

Amen to this. Total shambles. Embarrassing

Well done Allison. Happy my contribution was money well spent

There's some background to the Mermaids/LGB Alliance case here.

All told I would think Mermaids have overstepped the Mark here and would be well advised to back down. Meanwhile it's the end of the month and I think a little gardening is in order.

twitter.com/alliancelgb/status/1545724460937920512?s=21

yes I think you're @SpindleInTheWind there was an element of it's either SW or GCC if you sue them both they can't just sit there passing the buck.

That's twice it's now been acknowledged and recorded that 'ter*' is a slur - the first time in Scottish court, and now this.

Lol, I wonder if ALL the employers who have EVER taken advice from Stonewall are currently frantically pulling their policies from website, to remove its malign influence, and what this is doing to Stonewall's reputation.

And if not, why not?

I reckon this ruling might give women a way to legally challenge any policy that contains Stonewall lingo, especially if the employer is associated with Stonewall.

IANAL, but am enjoying my musings. Would be extremely grateful if any resident lawyer would confirm if it's a reasonable argument

Thank you Allison! Women in UK are lucky to have you,your courage, your conviction, your dedication to truth and to free speech!