Kelly v Leonardo Employment Tribunal Thread 3

[ickky]

If you want to observe send an email to

[email protected]

Subject line

Ms BM Kelly v Leonardo UK Limited Employment Tribunal – hearing Case number: 8001497/2024

Ask for the link and pin to observe.

State you are a member of the public and give your full name and the email address you will use to access the tribunal.

Abbreviations:
C or MK - Claimant, Maria Kelly
NC - Naomi Cunningham, barrister for C
KW - Katy Wedderburn, solicitor for C
R or L - Respondent. Leonardo UK
ST - Susanne Tanner KC, barrister for R
J - Judge
P - Panel member
GC - gender critical
GI - gender identity
AL - Andrew R Letton VP People Shared Services Leonardo - respondent witness

Tribunal Tweets coverage here

https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/kelly-vs-leonardo-uk-ltd

Thread 1 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5416903-kelly-v-leonardo-employment-tribunal-29th-september-10am?page=1

Thread 2 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5420656-kelly-v-leonardo-employment-tribunal-thread-2?page=1

Unite

I think Unison is the only one mentioned, but that was in relation to meetings that Maria Kelly was part of rather than in relation to advice sought by the company

I'm struggling to see how anyone can believe that TWAW or why they'd need the recent clarification from the supreme court because TW are men, always have been, always will be. The protected characteristic is sex, and that hasn't changed.

I don't have any sympathy for the companies who bought into/buy into believing that a man in a dress means he has the same legal rights as biological women. My sympathies firmly lie with women whose rights have been trampled on, overlooked and misinterpreted.

MK visibly upset. 🤬

Sorry @GCITCis correct - Unite not Unison

Now we can't hear Naomi either

From TT

We resume

NC - turn please to p 72. HAve you read that letter before.
AL I believe so
NC - read again?
AL - [missed}

I believe Unite is the union that has been referred to in TT posts.

To the best of my knowledge getting a good bit of use

From TT

AL reading document several minutes]
NC - [missed poor sound]
NC - in a nutshell it acknow that L has been given certain advice that is contrary to law.

In that context it makes the unconventional suggestion, that given L would want to keep temp low. But it wasnt stupid sugg

I actually understood a sentence AL said! I may pass out with the shock

At a basic level are you who you say you are, and do you have ties to groups we wouldn’t want to access the info you would have access to. At higher levels it’s also about how easy it would be to blackmail you. Financial issues, affairs, sexual practices you don’t want made public. That sort of thing

I've given up on the decorating. I'm in too much of a froth at Andy. What a wanker.

None of which render you necessarily safe around women, or indeed men.

I’ve never heard well organised said as an insult before!

From TT

NC - as it turned out the C hasn't need to crowdfund. And until now no press at all
AL
NC there has been complete silence from C
AL yes
NC - you may not know but she has not mentioned during the hearing.

NC - she was keen not to make personal, it is the policy not the indiv
Is that fair minded?
AL yes. [sound poor apologies]
NC she has been at pains not to make personal
AL yes
NC - she is doing best to be a civilized dispute
Turn to p75 for response from counsel

NC - please read and let me know when you are done.
[pause for AL to read]

I just want to go and give Maria a hug this is wretched for her.

NC a very thinly veiled threat

See also “Conspicuously Law Abiding Women,” as another insult…

I wonder whether these secret meetings take place in secret toilets?

Andy's cough has returned

From TT

NC - that is a hostile response isn't it?
AL um i can only say that i hasn't taken part...and can only assume read in context...there was concern issues associated
NC - nothing in the C letter that she had no intention to name.
AL - [can't hear]

NC response a threat of discp action...the last para p75 'implied threat...' and the next para about reputational damage. Next para 'appropriate action'

Interesting to note that they have actually noticed that Jolyon and the GLP aren't actually doing much to help them.

AL is Trying to say correspondence was between legal people

Indeed. A criminal conviction might stop you getting a clearance. But not necessarily. And as we all know no convictions doesn’t necessarily mean you’re not a domestic abuser, rapist or general creep around women.