Allison Bailey v Stonewall

[impossibletoday]

https://x.com/BluskyeAllison/status/1979480101474443398?t=Sg3wz-Pq2S7lpQ2rTpJZ2g&s=19

Those are both good arguments for allowing an appeal to the Court of Appeal. Which is what took place. I just can't see the SC having a different take on overturning a finding of fact at the first level than the CofA.

I'm not saying you're wrong; just that that bolt has already been shot.

Yes we cannot fault her, no harm was done. Well other than losing a million pounds and humiliating herself by losing to Stonewall twice.

And it’s been worth every penny to expose the lunatics they have working at stonewall. They’ll think twice before going after people’s jobs now.

How on earth did Stonewall get away with saying that they don’t give advice? Their schemes are based on “statements” about what constitutes good practice and then they give detailed responses telling organisations how to score higher. How is that not advice?!

It isn't a loss of a million to expose their shakedowns. Money well spent.

Stonewall aren't winning out of this either way - winning the court case means they're successfully disowning responsibility for the advice they're selling. Who's going to want to buy now? They're disgraced either way but bravo to Allison for having a go at getting them to take responsibility for their actions.

Personally I dont see the Supreme Court giving permission to appeal. I think Stonewall should have been liable but 2 courts have disagreed.

I think it is a lot harder to say that a bunch of lawyers who claim to specialise in equality law should not have sole responsibility for following incorrect advice from non-lawyers on that law, than it would be if it were lay people following that advice.

Support dogs have gone down in history ....

It has been several months since the judgment was handed down so I presume permission to appeal was initially refused by the Court of Appeal and now Allison is seeking permission direct from the Supreme Court. Has this been confirmed anywhere?

No, the appeal was allowed and the case was heard at the Court of appeal but she wasn't successful

Sorry, I've obv not made myself clear. After failing to win her case at the Court of Appeal, Allison would have to ask the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal their decision to the Supreme Court. I presume they refused to give permission and now she is left with the final option of asking the Supreme Court itself if they will hear the case.

Chris lad, your typing is pointless, worthless, & at best an occasion of pity.
/engagement

I've just checked her website and it says she's submitted an application to the court of appeal for permission to appeal to the Supreme court. That was 23rd January

ETA I don't think there's been any decision on that application yet

Stonewall succesfully argued in court that it wasn't their fault that people following their advice might find themselves on the wrong side of discrimination law.

I do not think it is a coincidence that companies and organisations have been walking away from Stonewall affiliations and the diversity champions scheme ever since.

Whatever Stonewall may think, they were seen as "best practice" for diversity, as grown-ups who gave grown up advice. Companies and organisations believed they were getting expert help navigating a contenious and tricky area.

That value proposition is now dead in the water. I am not sure SW realised just how much "winning" with that defense shot themself in the foot.

Well, that's odd. It seems an application for permission to appeal was lodged with the Court of Appeal on 23rd January and another was lodged directly with the Supreme Court on 13th February: https://supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2026-0017

So it looks very much like the Court of Appeal did turn down the application, and quite quickly, which must surely be unusual.

It doesn't necessarily mean her chances of success are any less but, combined with a lack of update, it is a bit worrying.

I agree. And GCC lost that case after acting on a Stonewall complaint. It hurt them both financially and reputationally.

I think we can assume that permission to appeal was refused by the CofA, otherwise there would be no need to lodge an appeal direct with the SC.

i still think they’ll refuse.

This thread is confusing me - is AB going to the SC or not?

She is trying to, but can only do so if they agree to take the case.

She's gone to the Supreme Court to ask if she can go to the Supreme Court :-)

Exactly this.

They were between a rock and a hard place really. Three options available:

"Yes we were handing out wrong advice but we didn't know it was wrong - we believed in what we were saying at the time and said it in all sincerity because we hadn't thought it through, didn't know what we were talking about even though we were presenting ourselves as the advisory go to expert for help in this area, and basically aren't fit for purpose m'lud"

"Yes we were handing out wrong advice and we knew it was wrong, but our political agenda involved necessarily trying to get people to believe the law was other than it was, and drat, we'd have got away with it if it wasn't for those dratted kids....it's a fair cop."

"Yes, our advice isn't compatible with the law and isn't actually correct, but it's not our responsibility if people choose to believe us and don't check the facts for themselves, that's their bad. If people want to pay us to tell them wrong information that's their look out, and when the legal shit hits the fan we'll wash our hands and walk away."

None of the three choices were going to end well for them.

Cases like this and the Edinburgh Rape Crisis case opened one hell of a lot of eyes, thank you Alison for your courage and persistence.

"losing to Stonewall"