Mermaids vs LGB Alliance and Charity Commissioner - First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Thread 3

[nauticant]

The Tribunal started on 9 September, witness testimony started on 12 September.

To obtain access to view the proceedings, send a request email to [email protected] about case CA/2021/0013 - Mermaids vs Charity Commissioner and LGB Alliance and ask for permission to join. You then have to provide certain information and agree to a judge's direction in order to be able to join.

There is also live tweeting from twitter.com/tribunaltweets.

Abbreviations:

J or judge: Presiding Judge, Judge Lynn Griffin
AJ or Judge: Assisted by Judge Joe Neville
MG: Mermaids counsel is Michael Gibbon KC
KM: LGB Alliance counsel is Karon Monaghan KC
AR: Karon is assisted by Akua Reindorf
IS: Charity Commission counsel is Iain Steele

(Also the witnesses, PR: Paul Roberts, JN: John Nicolson. BB: Belinda Bell, BJ: Beverley Jackson, KH: Kate Harris, and EG: Eileen Gallagher.)

Thread 1: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4629679-mermaids-versus-lgb-alliance-in-court-today
Thread 2: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4632780-mermaids-vs-lgb-alliance-and-charity-commissioner-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chameber-thread-2
Thread 3: ongoing

Witnesses for the applicant (Mermaids):

Paul Roberts - CEO of LGBT Consortium (12 September)
John Nicolson MP - Deputy Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Global LGBT+ Rights (13 September)
Dr Belinda Bell - Chair of trustees of Mermaids (13 September)

Witnesses for the respondent (LGB Alliance):

Beverley Jackson - Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance (13-14 September)
Kate Harris - Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance (14-15 September)
Eileen Gallagher OBE - Chair of trustees of LGB Alliance (15 September)

Witness Statements:

Paul Roberts: lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Paul-Roberts-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
John Nicolson MP - lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/John-Nicolson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Dr Belinda Bell: lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Belinda-Bell-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Beverley Jackson: lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Bev-Jackson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits-1.pdf
Kate Harris: lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Kate-Harris-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Eileen Gallagher (two statements): lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Second-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf

Submissions:

lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Volume-4-Submissions-CA.2021.0013.pdf

(Header format follows the gold standard established by @ickky)

post updated by MNHQ at OP's request

At what point did SW pull out of this case? They truly left MM high and dry trying to find a case.

And of course, that's the other argument that, every time they did try to do something separate to defining homosexuality, like setting up a helpline for LGB youth, they were stymied by TRAs.

SW leaving people high and dry…. What does that remind me of?

How did we know whether making gay marriage legal would benefit society until we had done it? Are we sure it has benefitted society now? (I think it has, but it's not like there is a hard data proving it!)

Yes - that is true and would be an open and shut win for Mermaids were it not for the fact that Gender Ideology is a campaigning lobby group against women's rights, child safeguarding and LGB rights. And for the sexualisation of children and the breaking down of any and all boundaries relating to sex, fetishes, paraphilias and children.

It's not an entirely ridiculous argument because if you are supporting same-sex orientated people, you do have to fight the idea of same-gender orientation because the genderists are trying to force it on the world and change the meaning of the words gay, lesbian and bi. If they weren't, we could all rub along politely like Christian, Muslim and Jewish charities. So MG is correct about LGBA fighting the notion of same-gender orientation politically but he wants the court to ignore the context - the danger to same-sex attracted people.
I'm glad he's going first, so that KM can refute his argument.

😁

I see a pp has said the same as me but more succinctly!
😂

I don't envy TT trying to summarise this.

MG wasting time again - This wording is old fashioned. A more modern phrase would be x but I will stick to original wording as changing words can change perception of meaning.

What's the point in saying any of that, just get on with it.

It's a shame they can't get the 'public' in to demonstrate a public aim. I'd happily go along and say as a bisexual person, the sense of community LGB Alliance has given me has been a public good.

Directing tribunal to 'not sit on the fence' and find in favour of Mermaids

Words do have specific meanings which is why stonewall and mermaids can't just change words to mean what they want!

By this guy's logic, if a food bank charity were campaigning politically against an organisation that says that food poverty doesn't exist, then the food bank charity should be stripped of it's charitable status? Because it is only acceptable to fight for the rights of poor people to have food, it is not legitimate to fight the people who are denying the very thing you wish to campaign for?

Is he trying to argue against the wording of the Equality Act?

yes

Do they have to follow case precedent or could the tribunal acknowledge that if one charity seeks to change reality, another charity has the right to challenge it. Surely this has never happened before. New laws need to be written; new precedents set.

Or is he helpfully surfacing the word salad under the GR section?

And this is why language matters, ffs!

Is he saying the equality act is ambiguous so sex may not mean binary

MG saying that sex isn't immutable as shown in UK law, for example the Equality Act:

A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.

This seems like quite a reach and I'm not sure highlighting how shite the current laws are is helpful

MG is effectively arguing that equality law says that sex is mutable.

He's saying LGBA takes a view and seeks to educate the public on that view - but surely so do mermaids

Using the Equality Act against LGB people now. Bloody hell.