Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Appeal Tribunal hearing Thread 19

[ickky]

Allison Bailey has tweeted her intention to appeal the Stonewall decision.

twitter.com/BluskyeAllison/status/1572133035335716865

The Tribunal started on 25th April, witness testimony concluded on the 26th May. Closing arguments for council was on the 20th June.

There was also live tweeting from

twitter.com/tribunaltweets

tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/allison-bailey-vs-stonewall-and-garden

Abbreviations:

AB: Allison Bailey, claimant
BC: Ben Cooper QC, barrister for AB
SW = Stonewall Equality Limited (respondent 1)
IO = Ijeoma Omambala QC, senior counsel - barrister for SW
RW = Robin White junior counsel to SW - assisting IO
GC = Garden Court Chambers Limited (respondent 2) (GCC )
AH = Andrew Hochhauser QC, senior counsel - barrister for GC
JR = Jane Russell junior counsel to GC - assisting AH
RM= Rajiv Menon QC & SH = Stephanie Harrison QC (jointly respondent 3 along with all members of GC except AB)
EJ = Employment Judge Goodman hearing the case
Panel = Judge Goodman, Mr M. Reuby and Ms Darmas

Thread 1 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4529887-Allison-Bailey-v-Stonewall-Employment-Tribunal-hearing?
Thread 2 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4542466-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-2
Thread 3 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4545725-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-3
Thread 4 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4546945-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-4
Thread 5 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4548160-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-5
Thread 6 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4550451-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-6
Thread 7 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4551757-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-7
Thread 8 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4552521-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-8
Thread 9 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553181-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-9
Thread 10 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553754-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-10
Thread 11 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4555145-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-11
Thread 12 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4555687-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-12
Thread 13 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556235-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-13
Thread 14 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556407-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-14
Thread 15 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556803-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-15
Thread 16 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4557036-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-16
Thread 17 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4561850-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-17
Thread 18 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4574654-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-18

Allison Bailey - claimant (4-9, 11-13 May)

Witnesses for the claimant:

Dr Nicola Williams - Fair Play for Women (29 April)
Dr Judith Green - A Woman's Place (29 April)
Kate Barker - LGB Alliance (3 May)
Lisa-Marie Taylor - FiLiA (4 May)

Witnesses for the respondents:

Stephen Lue - barrister for GCC (3-4 May)
Zainab Al-Farabi - ex Stonewall (10 May)
Kirrin Medcalf - head of trans inclusion Stonewall (10 May)
Leslie Thomas - barrister at GCC (13 May)
Sanjay Sood Smith - Stonewall (16 May)
Shaan Knan - LGBT consortium - on STAG (16 May)
Rajiv Menon - joint head of chambers (16-17 May)
Maya Sikand - barrister at GCC (17-18 May)
Mia Hakl-Law - HR senior for GCC (18 May)
Judy Khan - barrister at GCC (19-20 May)
Charlie Tennent - clerk at GCC (20 May)
Luke Harvey - clerk at GCC (20 May)
Louise Hooper - Barrister at GCC (20 May)
David Renton - barrister at GCC (20 May, 25 May)
Marc Willers - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Stephen Clark - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Liz Davies - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Cathryn McGahey - Bar Council Ethics Committee's VC (24 May)
Tom Wainwright - Barrister at GCC (24 May)
Colin Cook - Head clerk at GCC (24 May)
David de Menezes - GCC, Head of Marketing (25 May)
Kathryn Cronin - barrister at GCC (25 May)
Michelle Brewer - barrister at GCC at time, now left and a judge (26 May)
Stephanie Harrison - joint head of chambers (26 May)

Closing arguments for AB, GCC, and SW (20 June)

Allison Bailey's Witness Statement

allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Witness-Statement-of-Allison-Bailey.pdf
Supplementary Statement
allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/C-Supplementary-Witness-Statement.pdf
Closing Statement
allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/CLOSING-SUBMISSIONS-FINAL.pdf

The Reserved Judgement (forth one down)

www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/ms-a-bailey-v-stonewall-equality-ltd-and-others-2202172-slash-2020

The last sentence of my email from Allison says:

Finally, please don’t share this with anyone else or invite them to send their own email in.

I didn't post the details here or anywhere else as she had asked me not to. Hope Iccky isnt a plant trying to derail things

Hope Iccky isnt a plant trying to derail things

I’m pretty sure Iccky has enough posting history on this topic to show she’s genuine. I would hope she’s not deliberately disregarding Allison’s email (if she received it that is) and found out the details by contacting the court directly, as she has done previously.

I didn't receive an email from Allison, if I'd known she didn't want remote viewers, I wouldn't have put the details up.

What did she say in the email with regard to viewers?

I received that email from Allison as well.

But, her hearing isn't listed on CourtServe at all next week.

So, i'm a bit confused.

After saying that it wasn’t agreed yet that there would be any remote observation at all, she initially asked that anyone who did want to observe to contact her, and then those that did were provided with instructions on how to make that request. And at the end of those instructions was the request that @MyPearlViper said - not to pass on the instructions to anyone else or to encourage anyone else to apply.

i didn’t get the impression she doesn’t want observers, the opposite actually. But there appears to be difficulties somewhere in the process, whether technical or objections from other parties we just don’t know.

I will ask MNHQ to delete the details to request remote viewing then, I looked on Court serve, but they only list the normal employment tribunals, not the employment appeal tribunals. So I googled and found this site.

https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/tribunals/employment-appeal-tribunal/

and I emailed the London one to see if they had the details.

Employment appeals are listed here. It is updated every Friday with the following weeks schedule.

I do hope remote viewing is allowed. It is a matter of open justice, but glad to hear that TT will be there in person to report if not.

employmentappeals.decisions.tribunals.gov.uk/public/causelist.aspx

@ickky you posted in good faith on a matter of open justice using publicly available information.

If I was a betting woman I’d say that the simplest explanation was that the courts are expecting that a larger than normal number of people would request remote access based on the numbers attending the original hearing. And the courts don’t have the staff to manage it, as discussed up thread, perhaps because they think this higher profile case would mean an increase risk of disrupters.

So Allison and Stonewall have probably been asked for names of people they want to observe and why, and if numbers are limited perhaps they will be taken into consideration when the judge decides who to admit, if anyone.

I haven't had an email from Allison, will the details posted originally still work or will my request for a link be rejected because I won't be either on Allison's or Stonewall's list?

No idea.

Not a scooby.

We’ve no idea if more people requesting remote observation will help or hinder overall because we’re only guessing at the reasons it may be restricted. We’ll find out next week.

I've just emailed back and forth with the clerk.

They're being very thorough!

Was it the LGBA vs Mermaids hearing where the Judge also wanted names and addresses of the observers?

Just want to apologise to Ickky and anyone else, I shouldn't have made that accusation about derailing. Sorry.

Me too, they want to know why I want to remote observe and can't attend in person!

@MyPearlViper No worries, I'm glad you said something as I didn't know. The last thing I want is to make life any more difficult or stressful for AB.

Same, @ickky .

I told him the truth, though. I said i would be wfh, so i had the flexibility to observe.

I've heard nothing 🤷‍♀️

Me either.

I’m assuming EAT is on Fetter Lane for in-person attendance?

Just found my email from Allison in my junk folder! Hope Tribunal Tweets were aware in time and get permission to attend.

TT are aware and to the best of my knowledge will be there.

I think it would be very wrong if Allison and Stonewall were the only ones who got to select observers. There are more people than those attached to those two who may be interested in the case and justice must be transparent. If there is more public interest then it should be more transparent not less.

I agree @Sloejelly .

It's not very Open Justice-y, otherwise.

I also agree with a PP, who said that perhaps one of the reasons that the court is being so thorough, is because of the potential for extra work for the clerks.

Justin made his feelings about that perfectly clear!
He was very unprofessional, actually. I think he was out of order.
It shouldn't be up to the whims of the clerk who can and can't join.

I'm not going to apply, although I remotely watched Allison's and Maya's tribunals which were informative , I feel that if spaces are limited I would rather give a space to someone who would make better use of the space.

I had second thoughts too, but then thought, why would I be any less worthy of being an observer than anyone else? Who judges what is “making better use” of the slot?

i then thought I bet men don’t think like this. I want to watch the hearing on the grounds of open justice and because I have an interest in the topic. So I’ve asked. People who think they may be more worthy can sort themselves out.