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!

I'm wondering what the benefit of an Employment Tribunal is at all if the guilty party can get away without significant costs and pretty much carry on as before.

At best they've had reputational damage but that wouldn't be the case for all Employers, depending on the business. What is the punishment for discrimination? Not a lot, seemingly.

You also get the impression that the bundle problems were deliberately caused, or at least the result of the arrogance with which GCC have conducted themselves throughout.

Oh oh oh! What have I missed?

I’m not keeping track of this hearing but Ms Russell seems to be saying it’s all Peter Daly’s fault.

Like Allison was such an annoyance to the lofty 'Do Right. Fear No One' Chambers - so they could be as disrespectful as they liked.

They didn't think she was strong enough to fight back.
They were wrong.

And also, would JR have mentioned that Peter Daly was preparing for Maya's case if it wasn't in the same milieu as Allison's?
If the case was Ms X vs Asda for disability discrimination, would she have brought it up like that, cos I don't think so.

That's about the size of it, which is complete bullshit.

I'd be mortified if were Jacqui McGuigan about now.

IANAL and IANAnETExpert so happy to be corrected but a costs order - considering the legal costs only - in an ET is separate to the basic award and any additional compensatory award to the successful claimant. It's comparatively unusual for costs to be awarded in ETs.

Losing businesses have to pay any basic award, which in simplistic terms is calculated similar to redundancy pay would be based on length of service etc, up to certain maximums (although awards in discrimination and whistleblowing cases can be unlimited), plus any compensatory award the panel deems appropriate which may take into account things like loss of future earnings, loss of pension rights etc. They also have to face any reputational damage losing the case may bring in their industry/sector or among the wider public.

Only rarely would they also be at risk of paying some or all of the claimant's legal costs, which is the part of Allison's case under consideration today.

I have a legal question for anyone qualified please.
Can a costs decision ( on it's own ) form a legal precident in the same way that a legal judgement can?

Excellent question, @lechiffre55
I would love to know, too.

First-tier ETs don't form legal precedent at all, only at appeal stage. That's why Maya's case was so vital - it was at appeal that GC beliefs were judged to be WORIADS.

My guess is that a costs decision is inexorably linked to the circumstances of the case which it follows.
But I'd love to know if a similar case with similar circumstances could expect to cite preceeding cases, could they also cite preceeding cost decisions during the costs phase.

IANAL but I am sure there is case law relating to costs. I have a recollection that you can charge for thinking time.

Blimey Jane Russell is laying the drama on thick, isn't she?

Love Ben - he is so exacting.

This bundle business is sending me a bit gaga now. I can only imagine how frustrating it must have been to deal with irl.

When, in many many years' time, EJ Goodman is on her deathbed, her final words will be "that fucking bundle".

Harpy 😂😂😂😂

Nice question from the judge and good response from Ben - Allison's fall in income was the largest in comparison with her peers. He really knows his stuff and can pivot in seconds.

I still feel mildly traumatised at the word "bundle" and I'm not even involved in this case...

As one of the numerous women who contributed to the crowd funder I’ll be really annoyed if it means GCC get off paying costs. I paid on the assumption that if she won and got costs awarded it would be up to Allison what she did with those costs.
If they manage to successfully argue they shouldn't have to pay Allison maybe we should all be bring a claim against GCC for a refund through the small claims court. Many of us will have the email confirmation somewhere, id be happy to see them tied up in small claims for the next couple of years

If they manage to successfully argue they shouldn't have to pay Allison maybe we should all be bring a claim against GCC for a refund through the small claims court.

All individual claims I hope?

'If they manage to successfully argue they shouldn't have to pay Allison maybe we should all be bring a claim against GCC for a refund through the small claims court.'

Yes I agree, and yes all individual claims too.

I'm given to understand that in ETs it's normal for both sides to pay their own costs in which case Allison would have used the crowd-funder money to cover her costs.

However, it is possible for costs to be awarded and the PP has stated that if this happened - in which case the money crowd-funded would effectively be 'spare' - then she didn't mind Allison keeping the money and doing what she pleased with it.

I'm not sure what's hard to understand about that.

I’m following on Tribunal Tweets so is BC saying GCC have done a back of a fag packet calculation for their costs?