Mermaids vs LGB Alliance and Charity Commissioner - First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Thread 4

[nauticant]

UPDATE: a transcript of the proceedings has been published and can be found here: lgballiance.org.uk/tribunal-transcript/

The Tribunal started on 9 September, witness testimony was heard from 12 to 15 September, and then, following a break, closing submissions are taking place on 7 and 8 November.

[This paragraph is probaby now redundant] 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 www.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: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4629679-mermaids-versus-lgb-alliance-in-court-today
Thread 2: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4632780-mermaids-vs-lgb-alliance-and-charity-commissioner-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chameber-thread-2
Thread 3: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4633653-mermaids-vs-lgb-alliance-and-charity-commissioner-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chamber-thread-3?page=31&reply=121335177
Thread 4: 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: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Paul-Roberts-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
John Nicolson MP - www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/John-Nicolson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Dr Belinda Bell: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Belinda-Bell-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Beverley Jackson: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Bev-Jackson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits-1.pdf
Kate Harris: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Kate-Harris-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Eileen Gallagher (two statements): www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Second-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf

Submissions:

www.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 in order to include the most up to date information.

KM submissions over, now back to MG. 😴

KM: Mermaids seek that to argue that LGBA's objects are not true and they've have uncovered the the true arguments, but they swerve around arguing there's a "sham" because they wouldn't succeed, they make insinuations conspiracy and an intent deceive the CC, they stigmatise LGBA's views on sexual orientation, and say they are used to signal something [presumably sinister], and LBGA view this as homophobic, and that it pushes LGB people who identify as same-sex attracted back in the closet.

I don’t like this assistant judge’s questions! I know you’re not supposed to draw any conclusions from judge questions but… is he captured? Penisbians 🙄

Does he mean Fair Play?

He did, Lipbalm...

Good grief.

What did he ask?

The question and claim about LGBA's world view being exclusionary actually undermines MM's claim to have standing in the case because it shows there is little overlap in the client base, surely?

Fuck knows.

Oh his voice, I am falling asleep already.

CC has finite resources. Tribunal is concerned with correct approach in law. CC will limit it's observations tribunal should interpret law.

Do chickens have the ability to access KFC and purchase food?

Marg finally solved the age old riddle. The chicken crossed the road because it wanted a party bucket.

I didn't like the one yesterday TastefulRainbowUnicorn - the whole business of the obsfucation of language to the point where we need clarification of terms everyone understands (to the extent that it is the actual name of one of the groups of respondents) makes my teeth itch.

They are Claw Lickin' Good

Granular means descending into minute detail. This is not a granular dispute.

If it is revealed that there is a gender critical dispute, that opens up all the disputes of this appeal.

I'm not sure what his point is.

Wallace** 'Oh his voice, I am falling asleep already.'

👆

I'm not sure what his point is.

I wonder if he knows what his point is. It's very hard to follow his meaning.

He's an aural tranquiliser dart.

His argument is moving in a granular fashion. Did I use it right?

That surely can't be an argument? If not, we're going to have to start whittling down the amount of charities by a considerable number, given that they are all effectively competing for a finite amount of money.

How odd that this thread is not appearing in Trending. It's trendier than some of the others.

Who's talking atm? I'm only following on here and TT, but TT is down at the moment.

Accusations of homophobia plays into the approach that LGBA have taken. We reject and say it supports our submissions of the purposes of LGBA

OMG he is so soporific. Have a hot water bottle on my lap and quietly nodding off

I do appreciate the point that MG is seeking to make, that counsel for LGBA and the CC were more about principles of how things should be properly ordered but the case itself is about the detail of the law and the details of the purposes and objectives of LGBA. I've been thinking along these lines since IS started his arguments yesterday.