Allison Bailey Appeal

[BordoisAgain]

She has just tweeted that she is appealing the decision to dismiss her claim against Stonewall in her recent case.

No news on if a garden is needed to be seeded though!

As wiser women than I have said previously...the process is the punishment.

That statement, so clear about why we speak up where we can, and the harm Stonewall has done and continue to do to lesbian and gay people, including children...she's just an absolute shero.

It seems to me to be an affront to justice that an employer can discriminate against an employee, harass them and lie about them, yet not have to pay their legal fees.

Ouch.

Well done Allison

Here is a link to todays judgement.

https://allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/2202172.20-Costs-Jment.pdf

Fab news

Looking fwds to Jolyon saying she wouldn't have go any money had the judge decided not to award her any money.

To be perfectly fair, it was really just a legal technicality that the bundle was a pile of shite AND in para 15, the judgment says they were “unimpressed” with AB’s approach, so on balance it’s basically a win for GCC.

Seems a good day to give this old username one last twirl. Congratulations, Allison. Great news.

Agree. This and the Mermaids case are quite sobering in that they reveal how bad actors can misuse the legal system to destroy charities or organisations or people they disagree with. It shouldn't be possible; they should cover all costs.

Quite surprised at the number of typos in that.

Absolutely brilliant! It's been a good week. Raising a glass to you Allison

it's like saying goodbye to an old friend!

Could have been worse, at least it doesn’t misspell “man” with a “wo” at the beginning.

@chilling19 "It’s not enough simply to have won your case: costs awards are only made against a party which has behaved vexatiously, abusively, disruptively or otherwise unreasonably, or where they have pursued a case that had no reasonable prospects of success. "

wow, I would have been nice had they had to pay the lot but I recall experts at the tie telling us that wouldn't be on the cards and to get anything at all would be unlikely. They awarded her the maximum that they could.

@SinnerBoy yeah ikwym but I'd say that the costs were far from typical

But still, having deeper pockets to allow a "win" is all day wrong. And yes, she has got the maximum possible, even though it's nowhere near enough.

And Spamtorrow could do with a trip to Planet Earth!

Bet old Robin "Somatically Female" Random-Bundles was popular at work when that judgement came out 😈

General astonishment GCC continued pushing it on costs. They got such bad publicity then, and this has just aired it all again.
Solicitors were TMP solicitors IIRC. Partner there should be wincing at this coverage.

Thanks, Penguin

Someone needs to change their username to SubstantiallyImperfectBundle.

With GCC, it does seem like a logic fail to have dragged this out again. The only thing I can think of is that their solicitors come out of this specific part worse than they do. The main detriment to their reputation was in the way they treated Allison, which is all out there already. Perhaps they thought that wasn't going to get any worse so they might as well try and mitigate the financial losses.

I wonder as well if there was anything going on behind the scenes with them and their solicitors. Bet you any money GCC won't be using them again anyway!

This phrase in Allison's statement is a typo, isn't it - should be the other way round.
"the legal costs I have had to incur are less than the amount that I have received."
Anyone know how to contact her so she can correct it? Understandably she doesn't have contact details on her webpage...

I'm not sure what's foremost in the qualities that Garden Court Chambers has demonstrated here--is it malice, or incompetence? A good mixture of the two, anyway.

Imagine hiring them for any kind of legal business. I'll look elsewhere, thanks.

I agree that it's strange. The people involved with this at Garden Court were very experienced and respected barristers, who have worked with bundles on a daily basis for decades. They would have recognised a badly-prepared bundle from 10 miles away.

If the solicitors were at fault, I'd expect Garden Court to demand compensation for their very substantial financial loss (their wasted costs as well as the tribunal's costs award). But perhaps they won't demand compensation. Oh to be a fly on that wall.

I wonder if the Chambers' attitude toward Allison spilled over into its preparation of the bundle? Simply couldn't be arsed to engage properly?

I don't know how else to explain this level of incompetence from a 'leading' set of barristers (and their clerks), except to add in some sort of psychological element permeating the Chambers.

If that makes sense?