Mermaids versus LGB alliance in court today??

[GrabbyGabby]

www.theguardian.com/society/2022/sep/09/trans-charity-mermaids-appeal-lgb-alliance-status

Not sure if it is today or next week. Do we know if this is open like the tribunals?

Anyone else wondering why Mermaids have brought this action, rather than Stonewall themselves?

Could someone pm the code, please? Have officially requested but no response.

This is specifically prohibited so unfortunately you'll have to wait. It took 3 hours between my initial request and getting access credentials.

I was in for a second and someone disconnected me...🤷🏻‍♀️

Anyone else wondering why Mermaids have brought this action, rather than Stonewall themselves?

Slightly better sense of self-preservation and optics than the other two parties? Their name was very briefly attached, then vanished.

@Birdsweepsin perhaps they wanted to keep their heads down, since their last appearance in a court room was so shambolic.

In case anyone is waiting and wondering what they're missing at the moment it's preliminary discussion about whether the bundle, or parts of it, might be available to the public.

Until Tribunal Tweets is allowed to tweet, if I post it'll be general and occasional.

I miss Andrew Hochhauser already!

For anyone wanting to join, the clerk is crossing checking their joining attempt with whether the joiner has sent an email complying with the judge's direction before permitting access.

They are dotting the i's and crossing the t's, this morning...

Thanks, nauticant.

Stonewall are a more professionally run organisation than Mermaids. As a general observation.

Quite!

Can you imagine if this Mermaid’s argument (from the Guardian article) won?

Mermaids, which supports transgender, nonbinary and gender diverse children and their families, launched an appeal last year against the Charity Commission’s grant of charitable status to the LGB Alliance. It argued that the group was set up primarily to lobby the government to restrict the legal rights afforded to transgender people.

Surely we could then argue that pro trans charities such as Mermaids ‘seek to lobby to the government to restrict the legal rights offered to women, girls, non trans identifying children and people with conservative religious beliefs’?

the road to hell is paved with Ms Green’s good intentions.

I see that Tribunal Tweets are calling all the QCs KC now, which answers a question I have had idly for years.

Since the observers have to use their real names (displayed on screen) looking down the list is interesting.

Also interesting is the screen has "Recording Enabled" on it making me wonder whether a transcript could potentially be obtained. Although something tells me there's going to be less astonishing witness testimony than in earlier tribunals we've followed.

Surely LGB Alliance was founded to advocate for people captured within and uphold the protected characteristic of sexual orientation? Not to piss on Mermaids’ chips. If ever the phrase “you do you” was warranted, it’s here. 🙄

Wow. Head f**k! 🤯

obvs all those changes have to happen but it’s weird for most of us who have never known King’s Counsel /King’s Guard etc.

well done to tribunal tweets. It was funny listening to news readers say ‘Prince Charles’ and immediately correct themselves last night - not an easy adjustment to make so fast!

It looks like today is going to be a procedural day and there won't be any witnesses giving evidence till next week.

This is a very non-nonsense judge.

Have they reconvened yet? I'm just getting 'waiting for the conference host to join'

In now. Permission for live tweeting being granted.

Yep, it happened automatically. Most chambers have already updated websites.

Live tweeting is permitted, subject to conditions, and subject to ongoing review. The judge was rather strict in setting out the conditions.

It might be my mistaken interpretation but there does seem to be more of an emphasis on open justice than in, say, the Allison Bailey proceedings.

I'm wondering whether there have been two lessons from those proceedings: (1) when there's unusual active public interest, you've got to keep join them on a short leash, and (2) don't be too restrictive with public access to documents.

I completely agree, Nauticant.

AH and IO were strongly opposed to the public seeing the bundles.

After the Allison Bailey case it seems odd to listen to a barrister directing the court to go to specific places in the bundles without this involving a great deal of confusion with people going off in all directions and getting lost.

It is remarkable that Mermaids are engaging in this action, though I suppose it's just one plank in the larger strategy of suppressing dissent by any means possible.

I am quite surprised that a charity is allowed to take legal action of this nature. Surely taking legal action against another charity doesn't fall within a charity's remit? Are they funding it out of donations people have made to them to support children? It seems inappropriate to say the least.

I assume that will be considered under the issue of 'standing' - Mermaids are arguing a) objectively that LGBA is not a charity but a political lobbying group (interesting bit of DARVO going on there) and b) that they are negatively impacted by that aspect of LGBA. But as others have said, this could open up a whole can of worms..

Tribunal Tweets1m
MG: Section 30 (Charity Commission regs). Is re registration. Every charity must be registered.
MG: S36: deals with objections to registration. A person affected can object on grounds that this is not in fact a charity and can apply for removal.