Judgement in Mermaids v Charity Commission tribunal expected in days

[RoyalCorgi]

This is the case where Mermaids challenged the Charity Commission's decision to give charitable status to the LGBA.

Don't have any more detail at the moment, but thought you'd all be interested. It's been a four month wait already.

Thank you, @RealityFan . That makes good sense to me.

I thought it sticks out like a sore thumb in the judgment para 42 where Belinda Bell describes the objects of Mermaids as "the relief of mental and emotional stress of all persons aged 19 years and under who are in any manner affected by gender identity issues, and their families...."

"Affected by" having become a rather pertinent point. So it includes detransitioners, people who are told that their sex is wrong because they like the wrong toys, etc etc? Because I think that is simply untrue.

"Gender identity issues" now affect almost any child that hears the message that it's possible for your personality to be 'wrong' for your body. A message that Mermaids perpetuates.

Look, if Mermaids want to identify as the charities commission then the cis charities commission should check its privilege and let them do what they like.

Trans charity commission rights are human rights! Er...

twitter.com/transwidows/status/1676904787533615104?s=46&t=PSGltfjrMyZmBtYq2-AVIQ

I think the point that the judges can not give judgement past the remit of the question asked of them (and they certainly can not be critical of Mermaids conduct outside of this court case)

And there is the question of the Charity Commission having to demonstrate political neutrality and only being able to comment about conduct pending a full and proper investigation after a complaint has been made.

In the case of the LBGA conduct, there isn't a case into their conduct and whilst there may be 'concerns' that doesn't mean that an investigation would find those concerns to be upheld as fair and legitimate concerns that would merit the loss of the charitable status of the LBGA.

We need to fully understand and recognise these point before jumping to conclusions / in response to PR statements. The principles of how judges may act and the requirements of how the charity commission are run are important things to put into the context of how the ruling will have be written and how the charity commissions statement is worded.

The LBGA may need to be more cautious and careful about how they phrase things at this point given the ruling - just out of prudence and wisdom all the same.

HOWEVER I cavet that by saying that Mermaids have to be equally mindful in what their own next moves are. Going after the LBGA again on any grounds in any context may well backfire on themselves MASSIVELY. If Mermaids fail to heed that warning, they may well end up worse off than the LBGA eventually.

I don't.

Mermaids are fucked if they want to go there.

Is there any intel on when the Charity Commission investigation of MM will read out? It would be poetic justice for them to launch an appeal and then get hammered by the Commission for being run by a bunch of kids with er, interesting interests.

Didn't they drive Green out, claiming she was homophobic? Well, they got that one thing right, at least. Just for different reasons than us.

Racist and ablist, iirc?

Great analysis from Barbara Rich on Twitter;

''Keeping in mind that the legal test of standing required Mermaids to argue that it was “affected” by the decision to register LGBA as a charity, and its evidence that LGBA was affecting Mermaids by impeding its work, I find this assertion by Mermaids a little surprising''

https://twitter.com/BarbaraRich_law/status/1676897089043701761

Trans charity Mermaids loses case against LGB Alliance

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fe4795da-1be3-11ee-8198-bf96b6365670?shareToken=fda66b9e421f6f7bc6d6b3d62b7a6231

On Green’s ousting:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11506103/amp/Transgender-charity-Mermaids-refuses-staff-report-isnt-safe-space-read-it.html

Right?! "Turns out we aren't affected by LGBA being a charity - why, did someone think we said we were?"

In case pictures don't load: that was from the Mermaid's statement on the ruling which included this gem
"What does this mean for Mermaids?
This decision has no reflection on Mermaids, the work we do or the people that we exist for. We will continue to focus on providing the highest quality support to trans, non-binary and gender diverse children and young people, their families and the important people in their lives, and to making the world a better place to grow up trans."

Mermaids also says that boys can turn into girls and girls can turn into boys 🪄🤷‍♀️

Well what an unholy waste of money all round. Is there any possibility of awarding costs in this kind of thing or does each party bear their own? Mermaids have wasted plenty of their own money, but also LGBA's.

Of course Mermaids didn't have standing, they don't have legs. Which makes shooting themselves in the foot quite an achievement 🤔

In terms of politicalisation of charities.

Think about the impact of a ruling on political grounds against the LGBA.

That would also mean a charity which was concerned with the arts calling another charity 'transphobic' potentially is also overly political and outside the remit of their charitable aims. Especially one which had been done for harassment of an employee on the basis of her beliefs.

Mermaid/Stonewall intending to go after the LGBA for being overly political and beyond civilised debate begs questions on sanity.

I still think they will now start their own action, taking the notes of the judgement into consideration to ensure that they don't fall foul of the same situation. Someone advised them to step back at some point and I just have a gut feeling it is this.

Here's the BBC news item on this:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65340857

I am particularly enjoying their use of inverted commas.

Here's the text:

Trans charity Mermaids loses challenge against LGB Alliance
By Lauren Moss and Josh Parry, LGBT correspondent & producer

"A transgender charity's attempt to get an organisation it described as having an "anti-trans focus" removed from the charity register has been dismissed.

Mermaids launched the legal challenge after the Charity Commission registered the LGB Alliance in 2021.

The LGB Alliance supports lesbian, gay and bisexual people, but Mermaids alleged the group sought to undermine its charitable activities.

On Thursday the tribunal ruled Mermaids was not entitled to bring the case.
Mermaids' challenge is believed to be the first time a charity sought to strip another charity of its charitable status.

But the tribunal ruled that while Mermaids and its supporters may have been affected by LGB Alliance "emotionally and/or socially," this did not give them the legal right to appeal against their registration as a charity.

Mermaids was set up in 1995 to support children and young people questioning their gender identity. It said the LGB Alliance sought to "destroy" its reputation and sources of funding.

LGB Alliance says it exists to advance the rights of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people. It insisted it is not transphobic and does not endorse discriminatory behaviour towards any group or individual.

Kate Barker, chief executive officer of LGB Alliance said she was "delighted" with the decision, but added "the cost to us and to our supporters has been huge".
Mermaids said it is disappointed by the ruling and is considering whether to appeal.

The tribunal had been asked to consider whether LGB Alliance should have been registered as a charity, but the two judges on the panel were unable to reach an agreement. Both judges agreed the case should be dismissed.

The tribunal heard arguments about the definition of homosexuality, transgender rights and gender identity services for children and young people, during a week of evidence at the general regulatory chamber in London in September.

The Charity Commission said its role is not to regulate public debate on sensitive issues but to apply the law when registering charities."

The Guardian by Amelia Gentleman, lovely picture at the top

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/06/trans-charity-mermaids-fails-to-have-charitable-status-stripped-from-lgb-alliance

Bloody hell, i hope not.

Who would have standing to have a go?

We all know this is about keeping them tied up in legal issues til they give up.

Can stonewall risk a high profile loss? Surely bringing essentially the same complaint now would be considered harassment and wouldn't be kindly received? Although it might give stonewall the opportunity to reveal as much of their colossal silliness as mm did, so it might open some eyes.

People should really think twice about supporting a charity that spends so much money on legal fees in a case to strip another charity of charitable status.

Just heard The World at One's interview with Kate on this - Sarah Montague says that trans people are 'treated very harshly'.

Odd, when just this week a trans sex offender was spared a jail sentence that 'would normally attract immediate custody.'