Allison Bailey v Stonewall

[impossibletoday]

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

Best of luck to Allison! Well done for standing up to the Stonewall bullies 💐

That was a good listen. Didn't the conference completely avoid any mention of the SC judgment? 😂
Presumably hoping to avoid having to acknowledge that they'd been economical with the truth about the law of the land

I listened to that recently - it was absolutely jawdropping. It cost nearly £400 for a ticket, there were no handouts or takeaways, photography was strictly banned, there were no audience questions allowed, and Tanya and Maya F, who went together, were followed around by minders the whole time.

The guy she had as the other person on the podcast used to work for Stonewall before it went mad. She asked him what he'd have done if he was organising it, and his ideas sounded excellent.

Allison's Chambers won't be the only people that Stonewall advised to do something unlawful.

If the ruling is in her favour, this could open the floodgates, and absolutely bury them

Oh great there goes any work I was going to do next week. We need this to succeed for the floodgates to be opened. The slow dismantling of this batshittery is delicious. Reducing them all to a pile of weird beta males in dresses having their arses handed to them by strong women.

I’d like to know how many organisations quietly left Stonewall’s pyramid scheme after this unedifying performance.

Yes - conference where no photos or social media were allowed. The echo chamber must be maintained!

I found this article from The Legal Feminist helpful in explaining the point that is being appealed.

https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2024/07/24/bailey-v-stonewall/

Thanks for the link, I wonder how the first ET didn't find '....that Stonewall, through Kirrin Medcalf, had “induced” or “caused” that discrimination.' , when it seems quite oblivious that's exactly what Kirrin Medcalf did? 🤔

They agree that Stonewall induced it but didn't think it was fair and reasonable for Stonewall to be liable for the act of discrimination

I expect the hearing will be legal arguments about what "cause" means which is likely to make it difficult to follow

That’s really helpful thank you @spannasaurusand thanks for the thread @impossibletoday

I would like to see Stonewall get it in the neck as well, but couldn’t the much-supported Kirin argue that all they/thems intended was for GCC to buy Allison cream cakes and talk nicely to her until she saw the light? That it was GCC alone who chose to interpret it in nasty ways?

Goodness me; a busy busy week next week! It really shouldn’t have to be so.

I see the TRAs are attacking Allison with their racist 'spaghetti briefcase' nonsense all over bluesky.

so next week is Alison Bailey and the Darlington nurses - anything else I've missed?

(3) A person (A) must not induce another (B) to do in relation to a third person (C) anything which is a basic contravention.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (3), inducement may be direct or indirect.

Well, isn't that interesting? Surely it can be argued convincingly that Stonewall did induce them, along with threats of what might happen, if they did not stick it to Alison?

I stand to be corrected but I think Kelly v Leonardo re-starts on 22nd Oct, and is Glinner back in court on 29th?

Thanks, if someone could do like a list of dates, or signpost, that would really help with keeping track of them all!

ah, Ben's skeleton is a thing of beauty (swoons)

Where are you reading the skeleton - did I miss a link?

All the very best to Allison. 👏👍💪

Oh my, that email. It's illiterate.

Kirrin Metcalf's letter is arrogant, whiny and sloppy. Quite an achievement.

The complaints about AB calling male people men, or "misgendering" specific individuals look even more ridiculous post SC clarification.

Regarding Bourne's judgement, it's odd that he did find that Stonewall had "caused" Garden Court Chambers to discriminate against AB, yet also found that it would be wrong to hold Stonewall liable for causing that treatment.

I added 4 extra packets of biscuits to the online shop that DP was doing today. When he queried this as unusual, I said it was a major week in the quest for sanity and he laughed and agreed I would need my emotional support biscuits.

https://allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Claimant-Appellants-Skeleton-Argument.pdf

A fun canter through familiar names. It is impossible to read Shan Knaan without hearing Kenneth Williams.

Excellent, thank you.