Ben Cooper QC - Lawyer of the Week (in the Times)

[Justme56]

Sorry I can't share the article, but liked this:

What is the funniest thing that has happened in your job?

As a result of my work in this area, apparently becoming an object of admiration on Mumsnet [the Internet parents' forum] - improbable in many ways.

😁

[Hearach15]

@whereareyounow

Ben's a great lawyer, he did the best he could but never had a snowball's chance in hell of winning the AB case.

Maybe if AB had had a better lawyer she would have won against Stonewall. I presume she didn't raise 500k just to sue the organisation with no hope of success.

As it is 500k legal fees and only 20k compensation from Garden Chambers seems a poor exchange for Mr Cooper's no doubt large legal fees.

[Hearach15]

@Chrysanthemum5

@whereareyounow did we watch a different case? AB and her team won, and the bits they didn't get a positive judgement on (stonewall) are still terrible for stonewall

Stonewall won the case against Allison Bailey. No matter what way you spin it she lost

(And their revenue has gone up, up, up in recent years. Must be that all the hate from GCs has given them a lot of good publicity among the LGBT community and allies).

[TopKnotch]

@Hearach15 tell me you didn't watch the live feed of the ET, without telling me you didn't watch the live feed.....

The IDEA that that those responsible for the most embarrassing and frustrating court bundle blundering, and completely unable to competently operate a webcam or mute at appropriate times, could win any sort of award is seriously worthy of scorn. That's without mentioning the very serious suspicion (unproven) that the muttered insults of AB came from their microphone.

[Hearach15]

@WinterTrees

I hope he has read through the threads ☺️

One of the brilliant things about MN is that it provides a real time record of all sorts of things. In this instance, it's a frame by frame breakdown of Ben's exceptional performance - his quips, his arguments, his gotchas, his responses, his calm, dignified demeanour and his grace under fire. I hope he enjoys reliving a difficult case via the medium of MN and the wit of the vipers!

"Ben's exceptional performance" - he lost the case.

Stonewall had a much better lawyer.

[BlessedKali]

I would suggest no one bite to the above comment... it deraules the positivity.

Anyway, I have three kids under 5 so no time to watch the court cases or to read through the threads.

I would love it if someone collected all the stella Ben Cooper moments in one place 🙏

[Hearach15]

@WinterTrees

It's hilarious that people still drop into these threads to insist that Allison didn't win 😂

Weird, because I read Stonewall won.

[PurgatoryOfPotholes]

@Hearach15

"Ben's exceptional performance" - he lost the case.

Stonewall had a much better lawyer.

Which one was that then?

[Hearach15]

@TopKnotch

@Hearach15 tell me you didn't watch the live feed of the ET, without telling me you didn't watch the live feed.....

The IDEA that that those responsible for the most embarrassing and frustrating court bundle blundering, and completely unable to competently operate a webcam or mute at appropriate times, could win any sort of award is seriously worthy of scorn. That's without mentioning the very serious suspicion (unproven) that the muttered insults of AB came from their microphone.

I don't need to watch the livefeed to know the Mr Cooper lost his client's case against Stonewall.

She should have hired a better lawyer.

[Hearach15]

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Which one was that then?

Whoever represented Stonewall - aka the lawyer who won the case.

[BlessedKali]

Arguing with these new posters is like arguing with the someone still polishing the brass as the titanic was sinking... It doesn't matter if they are polishing the brass, and it doesnt matter if we agree.... Ths ship is absolutely sinking.

[Hearach15]

@BlessedKali

Arguing with these new posters is like arguing with the someone still polishing the brass as the titanic was sinking... It doesn't matter if they are polishing the brass, and it doesnt matter if we agree.... Ths ship is absolutely sinking.

Very true. Making Mr Cooper 'Lawyer of the Week' is like making the Captain of the Titanic 'Sailor of the Week'. Both failed their clients.

[BlessedKali]

Bunbury makes the best captain! Keeps us all on course.

[Hearach15]

"The tribunal also rejected Ms Bailey's claim against her chambers that she had lost work and income because of her beliefs."

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-62294030

Should also be noted that Mr Cooper did not even win his client's case against Garden Chambers on the most important aspect of the case. Had he won this part of the case AB would have been entitled to substantial compensation £££.

[TopKnotch]

Did we ever find out if he actually stood the whole time, or was he on some sort of kneely stool thing?

I wonder if that's his usual working position - I would have to have way more breaks and little sits!

[ErrolTheDragon]

Well, isn't it nice when everyone is happy?
Ms Bailey and the numerous people who donated to fund her case are happy with her win against her employer.
Everyone is happy, apparently, with the result re stonewall - some see it as a victory, while others can see that if it was, it was a Pyrrhic one.

[TheBiologyStupid]

@Hearach15

Why is he lawyer of the week - he lost the case against Stonewall and won in one aspect against Garden Chambers.

Surely Stonewall's lawyers who won the case in court are more deserving of this accolade?

Some victory for Stonewall! The Tribunal said in paragraph 293 of its judgement: “We concluded that all the claimant’s pleaded beliefs, not just the belief that woman is sex not gender, are protected”. Those protected beliefs, as set out in paragraph 279, are:

279. The beliefs for which Equality Act protection is claimed are set out in paragraph 8 of the further revised amended particulars of claim:

“She believed (and continues to believe) that the first respondent’s [Stonewall’s] campaigning on gender theory is sexist and homophobic. In particular, the claimant believed and believes that:

(a) Sex is real and observable. Gender (as proselytised by the First Respondent) is a subjective identity: immeasurable, unobservable and with no objective basis.

(b) At the root of the First Respondent’s espousal of gender theory is the slogan that “Trans Women Are Women”. This is advanced literally, meaning that a person born as a man who identifies as a woman literally becomes a woman for all purposes and in all circumstances purely and exclusively on the basis of their chosen identity. To all intents and purposes, the First Respondent has reclassified “sex” with “gender identity”.

(c) The tone of the First Respondent’s campaigning on this subject has been binary, absolutist and evangelical. It may be summarised as “You are with us, or you are a bigot.” Discussions on the subject have become extremely vitriolic, largely as a result of the First Respondent’s absolutist tone, replicated by other organisations with which the First Respondent works closely. This has resulted in threats against women (including threats of violence and sexual violence) becoming commonplace. The First Respondent has been complicit in these threats being made.

(d) Gender theory as proselytised by the First Respondent is severely detrimental to women for numerous reasons, including that it denies women the ability to have female only spaces, for example in prisons, changing rooms, medical settings, rape and domestic violence refuges and in sport.

(e) Gender theory as proselytised by the First Respondent is severely detrimental to lesbians. In reclassifying “sex” with “gender”, the First Respondent has reclassified homosexuality from “same sex attraction” to “same gender attraction”. The result of this is that heterosexual men who identify as trans women and are sexually attracted to women are to be treated as lesbians. There is therefore an encouragement by followers of gender theory (including the First Respondent) on lesbians to have sex with male-bodied people. To reject this encouragement is to be labelled as bigoted. This is inherently homophobic because it denies the reality and legitimacy of same sex attraction and invites opprobrium and threatening behaviour upon people who recognise that reality and legitimacy.

(f) It is particularly damaging to lesbians that the First Respondent has taken this position. The First Respondent had been the foremost gay and lesbian rights campaigning organisation in the UK and one of the world’s leading such organisations. The adoption of gender theory by the First Respondent therefore left those gay, lesbian and bisexual people who did not ascribe to gender theory without the representation that the First Respondent had previously provided, and left those people labelled as bigots by their primary representative organisation.

[Hearach15]

@ErrolTheDragon

Well, isn't it nice when everyone is happy?
Ms Bailey and the numerous people who donated to fund her case are happy with her win against her employer.
Everyone is happy, apparently, with the result re stonewall - some see it as a victory, while others can see that if it was, it was a Pyrrhic one.

Quite. I'm delighted Stonewall was vindicated! I hope she has to pay their legal fees £££. 😍

[Hearach15]

@TheBiologyStupid

Some victory for Stonewall! The Tribunal said in paragraph 293 of its judgement: “We concluded that all the claimant’s pleaded beliefs, not just the belief that woman is sex not gender, are protected”. Those protected beliefs, as set out in paragraph 279, are:

279. The beliefs for which Equality Act protection is claimed are set out in paragraph 8 of the further revised amended particulars of claim:

“She believed (and continues to believe) that the first respondent’s [Stonewall’s] campaigning on gender theory is sexist and homophobic. In particular, the claimant believed and believes that:

(a) Sex is real and observable. Gender (as proselytised by the First Respondent) is a subjective identity: immeasurable, unobservable and with no objective basis.

(b) At the root of the First Respondent’s espousal of gender theory is the slogan that “Trans Women Are Women”. This is advanced literally, meaning that a person born as a man who identifies as a woman literally becomes a woman for all purposes and in all circumstances purely and exclusively on the basis of their chosen identity. To all intents and purposes, the First Respondent has reclassified “sex” with “gender identity”.

(c) The tone of the First Respondent’s campaigning on this subject has been binary, absolutist and evangelical. It may be summarised as “You are with us, or you are a bigot.” Discussions on the subject have become extremely vitriolic, largely as a result of the First Respondent’s absolutist tone, replicated by other organisations with which the First Respondent works closely. This has resulted in threats against women (including threats of violence and sexual violence) becoming commonplace. The First Respondent has been complicit in these threats being made.

(d) Gender theory as proselytised by the First Respondent is severely detrimental to women for numerous reasons, including that it denies women the ability to have female only spaces, for example in prisons, changing rooms, medical settings, rape and domestic violence refuges and in sport.

(e) Gender theory as proselytised by the First Respondent is severely detrimental to lesbians. In reclassifying “sex” with “gender”, the First Respondent has reclassified homosexuality from “same sex attraction” to “same gender attraction”. The result of this is that heterosexual men who identify as trans women and are sexually attracted to women are to be treated as lesbians. There is therefore an encouragement by followers of gender theory (including the First Respondent) on lesbians to have sex with male-bodied people. To reject this encouragement is to be labelled as bigoted. This is inherently homophobic because it denies the reality and legitimacy of same sex attraction and invites opprobrium and threatening behaviour upon people who recognise that reality and legitimacy.

(f) It is particularly damaging to lesbians that the First Respondent has taken this position. The First Respondent had been the foremost gay and lesbian rights campaigning organisation in the UK and one of the world’s leading such organisations. The adoption of gender theory by the First Respondent therefore left those gay, lesbian and bisexual people who did not ascribe to gender theory without the representation that the First Respondent had previously provided, and left those people labelled as bigots by their primary representative organisation.

"Some victory for Stonewall!" Yes - they won, Allison Bailey lost 😍

[PurgatoryOfPotholes]

@Hearach15

Whoever represented Stonewall - aka the lawyer who won the case.

So you didn't watch the case, read any of the judgement, or do any research into this beyond reading one P××k News headline.

Case closed. Your opinion and posts are utterly irrelevant. Go and read a few books about Chip, Biff and Kipper, and don't return to us until you've developed a higher level of reading stamina.

[Hearach15]

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

So you didn't watch the case, read any of the judgement, or do any research into this beyond reading one P××k News headline.

Case closed. Your opinion and posts are utterly irrelevant. Go and read a few books about Chip, Biff and Kipper, and don't return to us until you've developed a higher level of reading stamina.

Stonewall won. Allison Bailey lost.

If you're happy that Allison Bailey lost her case and think that's a success for the Gender Critical movement, well, good for you.

[Hearach15]

And she didn't even win on every aspect of her case against Garden Chambers. On the most important charge (loss of income) she lost.

[TopKnotch]

Yes @ErrolTheDragon!

Great that we can all agree the judgement was a good thing!

[TheBiologyStupid]

@Hearach15

"Some victory for Stonewall!" Yes - they won, Allison Bailey lost 😍

Since you didn't read my post, @Hearach15, here's the short version of what Allison Bailey's case established as protected beliefs about Stonewall:

Stonewall's "campaigning on gender theory is sexist and homophobic" and it is "complicit" in "threats against women (including threats of violence and sexual violence)". "Gender theory as proselytised by [Stonewall] is severely detrimental to women for numerous reasons" and is "severely detrimental to lesbians [...] This is inherently homophobic [....]".

Not a good look for an organisation that was founded to fight for LGB rights, surely?