Allison Bailey v Stonewall

[impossibletoday]

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

Did he just say ‘cool’??

I hope so!

What did the judge say?

I have to be in stupid work meetings which is really very unfair

I heard that too

Why can't most cases that allow the public to view just stream to Youtube like this? It's so much better than having to get log in details a week before, getting repeatedly booted out, the system becoming overwhelmed by the numbers viewing, interruptions from viewers whose mics aren't turned off etc.

He said ‘we’ve found the page, so you don’t have to read it all out’.

And (i think) Ben said ‘cool’.

No squeaky doors, no mikes sounding like someone's speaking inside a bucket at the bottom of the Mariana Trench, no grumpy clerks or being randomly kicked out, this IS an improvement!

I keep reading SW as slimming world....I've been dieting too long....

The beauty of this live streaming is you can watch it on catch up.

I am just starting to watch now.

My surgery was this morning and I'm feeling great considering.

Once we have a break I'll start live pasting after that.

Ben has laid it out so clearly. Stonewall didn't expect nothing to happen and GCC did take action, therefore Stonewall's actions caused the detriment that Allison suffered.

@MyrtleLion glad the op went well.

I find both Ben and Naomi are very clear in their explanations.

Also, if you're behind with the stream you can stick it on 1.25x speed and it remains perfectly fine to follow.

I hope the surgery went well, Myrtle, and you're on the mend soon

‘… is about as culpable as it gets’ [of Stonewall].

Thank you, Ben Cooper.

Hi, @MyrtleLion, it’s good to hear from you and that your surgery went ahead and went (hopefully!) well.

So Ben Cooper is now assisting the judges with their questions on this part of his argument.

He reminds the court there is no hierarchy of protected characteristics, and that ‘belief’ is not a lesser characteristic than, say, sexual orientation or race or disability. The Equality Act gives them equal protection.

Ben Cooper makes the point that in deciding that Stonewall hadn’t gone far enough to be be found liable, the tribunal did not say what test it was applying, and what Stonewall would have needed to have done ‘extra’ to have been deemed liable.

(Sorry for any mangled grammar.)

I'm listening too, and am wowed by your clear summaries, @TheAutumnCrow

Yes, he's identified that the protected characteristic of GC belief doesn't seem as important to some people as say sexual orientation.

A viewpoint which runs through the entire ideology and everyone who supports it, as well as those who can't really muster up an opinion.

Now an interesting point about the relationship between Stonewall and Garden Court Chambers and how it’s not actually one of the legal points before the Court of Appeal today.

They've broken for lunch. Back at 1355.

Morning session is here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1980553551551308049.html

Just been listening, do pp think Ben is getting a hard time from the judges?

That's very kind! I'm really just picking out some key points that I think I've understood tbh.

It's very helpful to be able to follow a decent livestream, as pp have said.

All rise for luncheon.

It's great to have Myrtle back in action, take it easy, mind yourself well and get better ASAP
I've managed to find TT on Nitter, they are juggling three cases this week! but here is Allison's:
Tribunal Tweets 2 #OpenJustice (@tribunaltweets2): "The Appeal of Allison Bailey v Stonewall Equality Ltd starts at 1030 at the Royal Courts of Justice and will be live tweeted here. The proceedings will also be live-streamed here: https://www.youtube.com/@RoyalCourtsofJusticeCour-zp4wj/streams" | nitter.poast.org

I've just found a rather un-judge-like statement on TT
BC - ET found that GCC partial discrimination was NOT on the grounds of manifestation ie that any of those comms 'crossed a line'
J - that's a funny way of putting it

The judge does seem to be pushing BC for clarification, but that may not be a bad thing, it gives BC the opportunity to...er... well, clarify! and hopefully make the case more obvious.

I think it’s like the SC, in that they ask questions to get on the record a clarification they may want to use in their judgement.