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

Has anyone received a second email yet, as there was no joining instructions on the other one?

I’ve emailed to ask why my personal data was shared.

We all should, if we’ve been named.

There’s some people not just names and general location, but occupation too.

I note the email came from an Admin Officer, which I interpret as not a particularly senior grade.

NHS ward clerks are the lowest NHS grade there is. They have to have a full understanding of confidentiality.

Well quite.

i can understand instructions to send out the court order to the people named, i can understand instructions to contact the people who didn’t make to cut to let them know, but to mix up the two distributions is a basic admin error of a type that simply should not be made in that kind of environment.

@MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving you are free to complain, but I’m not going to.

Whilst I was surprised I know my name is visible when I have logged in before and this is part of open justice.

I have no issue with my name being made public but I do have issue with other identifying information being given out. That, to me, is a breach of GDPR.

I know my name is visible when I have logged in before

That's not comparable. You can choose your screen name; it doesn't come with additional identifying details such as location or occupation (I have a rare name - adding either of the other bits of info would immediately pinpoint me); and it wouldn't be visible to those who have been refused access.

Whilst I was surprised I know my name is visible when I have logged in before and this is part of open justice.

I didn't use my name previously. I'm sure it was available to the court but I just used my initials.

I didn't use my real name previously. You were asked to gave a name, there were checks that it was real.

I have googled myself using the details in the court order and I wasn't immediately identifiable from the results, so I have calmed down slightly. I didn't look up anyone else, I'm doing the equivalent of averting my eyes in a gym changing room and not looking. It's still an appalling fuck up to be so careless with sealed orders, but I understand sealed court orders can also be unsealed, so it's not really secret at all.

I also note with the standard footer/disclaimer at the bottom of the email about the it only being for the addressee etc, and includes the statement that "internet e-mail is not a secure medium". No shit.

OK, final post from me this afternoon as I really do need to crack on with some work if I want to meet some deadlines and not have to work all night.

Just got the log on details, it's a Teams meeting. And it includes the instructions that "the premises from which you attend shall, for the duration of the hearing, be deemed an extension of the Courtroom of the EAT". I shall make a sign for the door.

It's easy for me to say, as I'm not involved, but I think you should take legal advice. Asking for details in order to observe seemed wrong to me - you only give your details online when a retailer is going to deliver something to you, or in a formal application for a job or similar. If the ET is open to the public, then it's open to the public. If you were turning up in person, you would just go in, after being searched for weapons, I imagine. And then to publish those details by accident or design compounds the original error.
Perhaps I am blowing this out of proportion, so please feel free to correct me.

It's a sealed order, so the sharing of it is prohibited. It should not be found anywhere online.

I'm getting my 'I ❤️ Ben' banner ready as we speak.

Thanks, GTITC
But is everybody on the list getting details of everybody else on the list? Isn't that the court sharing details? Details which I don't see why it needed to take in the first place.

It's a sealed order, so the sharing of it is prohibited. It should not be found anywhere online.

Maybe not, but I shouldn't think the "Right Side of History" crowd are bothered about such niceties. We wouldn't be funding and observing tribunals if TRAs and their allies had observed the law...

Yes, but as we know it's been sent to at least one person inappropriately, we don't currently know who else has it and what their intentions are.

Plus, we have no idea if the other people named in the order are GC like us, TRAs or just neutral observers.

You could be viewing as an interest in either side. It doesn't automatically follow that everyone on that list is a nasty terf. I think we are extra vigilant because we are aware of past TRA tactics but there's nothing that could get you into trouble. Unless you're supposed to be working and worried that your employer will see you're not, that sort of thing.

So if we didn't receive the list then that means we didn't make the cut?

I sent a request last week and got the automatic reply but haven't heard anything since.

Did only 46 people get access?

Just got the teams link and the sealed order. Good job I don't mind my name being there first all to see.

I've already been doxxed (not via Mumsnet) and dragged through a transphobia complaint so I feel pretty blasé about this all now. Bring it on. Out and proud. Plus anyone fooling my socials might come to the conclusion that I'm supporting Stonewall anyway.

*fooling = googling

Do we know what time it starts tomorrow? I'm hoping to check in here for updates.

Starts at 10.30am tomorrow

Fooling was appropriate. 😁

Got my log in details, lets hope my shit camera and mic don't stop me observing this one!

Although they shouldn't have shared the names and occupations, it was interesting to see that the vast majority are women.