GLP are going after Sarah Phillimore and are going to lose - Part Two

[fromorbit]

The Story so Far

Part 1

The first thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5400132-glp-are-going-after-sarah-philmore-and-are-going-to-lose?page=1

Get the popcorn folks. GLP is getting ready to lose again.

They are going after barrister Sarah Phillimore for referring to a man as a man. They think they are going to lawfare her into silence.

Her blog:
Here we are now: Entertain us
I have had now 7 years and counting of the various tactics used to 'silence' those who won't comply with prevailing orthodoxy. How are those tactics holding up?
https://sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/here-we-are-now-entertain-us?

The only thing is other TAs have already tried this on Phillimore multiple times.

They went to the Bar Council their claims were dismissed. They all failed. More to the point this ‘Kate’ is the same guy complaining again who already failed. Sarah Phillimore knows the law and likes explaining it to TAs and making them lose. So she doesn't even resent the attempt.

As Sarah has stated "They pick on someone who not only enjoys this but has now a vast repository of knowledge about the law in this area."

Part 2

So the Fox Basher decided to tell massive lies about Sarah Phillimore now he faces a defamation action.

GLP's case against Sarah rested on evidence from "Kate" and this turned out to be the infamous man in a dress Sophie Sparkles. A guy who was too obnoxious, chaotic and threatening even for the Scottish Greens to tolerate. Even for someone as incompetent as the Fox Basher this plan seemed particularly bad.

A band of helpful gardeners assembled and planted a lot of seeds and soon Sarah's garden was blooming.

Sarah assembled a huge dossier of evidence about Sparkles showing his instability. She carefully built up her case using her excellent legal skills.

After giving the Fox Basher plenty of time to apologise Sarah took action for defamation in December and her blog outlines the story so far nicely:

Letter before Action
I publish here my letter to Jolyon Maugham. There is no freedom of speech to tell harmful lies about others.

For the background to all of this, please see my response to the complaint of the Good Law Project which they made to the Bar Standards Board on August 26 2025. Shortly after this complaint, Mr Maugham chose to assert to his many followers online that I had ‘led a campaign of harassment’ so wicked that it led a trans identifying man to attempt suicide. I deal with that claim at some length in my response. It is not true.

I asked via email on 30 August 2025 for Maugham to delete, apologise and make a donation of £5K to For Women Scotland. His refusal came a few days later in a series of videos posted to TikTok and Instagram where he was clearly excited about the (false) idea that JK Rowling would be joining me in legal action against him. Being able to tell his followers that he faced attack by the Nasty Billionaire Transphobe would clearly have more cachet and would attract more funds to the Good Law Project than a much less sexy tussle with a junior provincial barrister.

I am sorry to disappoint Mr Maugham. It’s just me. Well me, and the so far 990 very generous people who have helped me raise the money to be able to even contemplate this kind of legal action. My grateful thanks to every one of them. I do not think that anyone has ‘freedom of speech’ to tell harmful lies about another person and certainly not a senior member of a regulated profession, who will rely on his status to give his words power and cause harm.

https://sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/letter-before-action

Now the Bar Standards Board has decided that Sarah has no case to answer and released a letter explaining how the GLP had failed again. Details here:

Right Here. Right Now.

Another stunning technical victory for the Good Law Project shows that sanity is being restored to the public debate about gender identity, slowly but ever so surely.

On 27 March 2026 I received the welcome and to be honest not entirely expected news that the Bar Standards Board was not going to investigate further the complaint of the Good Law Project against me on behalf of trans identifying man Euan Weddell, aka Sophie Molly/Sparkles.

https://sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/right-here-right-now

GLP are planning to release a statement which will no doubt spin what has happened as much as possible in its usual style.

Will the Fox Basher's long history of misogynistic hatred for any women who has knowledge about biology and legal incompetence come back to haunt him again?

If he is defeated it will be a warning to all TAs that this type of bigotry and massive lies are not going to be accepted legally in a country where women and men are legally equal.

Whatever happen's Sarah's bravery once again will pay a significant part in restoring a world in which discussing the reality of the existence of male and female human beings is accepted.

Her garden still needs more plants, and harvest so far has been excellent and you can keep watching this thread for more proof of that.

It's somewhere north of the neckline is my guess. Mental ill health is fully shit craic and I wish him better health in the future, if it's indeed that.

More good news.

Sarah has entered the next stage:

Claim form in defamation issued today. I think the harm Maugham does extends significantly beyond what he has tried to do to me. I think it is worth standing up against this, and him. Even if twenty years from now a hundred more Maughams proliferate, at least I tried to do something about this one. I think my defamation action will be illuminating for many who still consider him ‘expert’.

FINALLY!
Claim form in libel issued. Let's go.

https://sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/finally

More big news
Roddy Dunlop KC has offered to represent me No Win No Fee and I am very grateful.

Dunlop is a legal star who has been vocal in his stance on supporting women's rights and calling out dangerous threats to the rule of law like Maggie Chapman when she attacked the Supreme Court:
https://www.axiomadvocates.com/advocate/roddy-dunlop-kc/
https://www.globallegalinsights.com/news/faculty-of-advocates-demands-apology-over-appalling-supreme-court-remarks/

The fox botherer should be worried.

You can find the link to Sarah's garden on her substack.

I look forward to his bravado on Bluesky later.

Does anyone have a gift token for this or can successfully archive it

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/23/legal-world-torn-apart-trans-rows-supreme-court-ruling/

I managed to read Sarah Philimore's name and something about GC KCs being mass reported before the paywall came down.

For some reason archive isn't working for me with this article although it has for other Telegraph pieces.

That's a weird archive message. I've not seen that one before!

Try this one, it's just worked for me: <a class="break-all" href="https://removepaywalls.com/4/www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/23/legal-world-torn-apart-trans-rows-supreme-court-ruling" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://removepaywalls.com/4/www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/23/legal-world-torn-apart-trans-rows-supreme-court-ruling

Ah, that's a bit of a mess. I'm guess that copy and paste might do it.

Those both bring up a 404 error 🙁

Weirdly c&p gives you the same strange error that the pp got.

Wonder if it’s a Telegraph issue.

Just tried archive, worked OK for me.
https://archive.ph/u7EVN

She later filed an employment claim saying it was because of her trans-critical beliefs, which she initially lost. However, she then won an appeal which allowed the case to be reheard. Ms Forstater won the second hearing. It successfully established that such views could be protected under the UK’s Equality Act.

The barrister later sued Garden Court Chambers and Stonewall itself, claiming she was discriminated against for her trans-critical beliefs. (Re Allison Bailey)

Twice in that Telegraph report they describe gender critical beliefs as trans critical beliefs

Thank you. Funnily enough atmosphere when I click on the article link I posted upthread the article just opens. No paywall. I can even read the comments.

I've just noticed the picture of Justice at the head of the article, she's blindfolded with the trans flag.

Eta. I'd rather they use 'trans-critical', which is arguably not incorrect, than 'anti-trans', which is usually wrong and prejudicial.

I've just done a Chrome Find search on that article and the expression trans-critical is used eleven times. I've never seen it anywhere before.

Gift token as well

Legal world torn apart by trans rows despite Supreme Court ruling

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/b8dccc4d66dd28f1

From NC's X account:

"I'm quoted accurately enough in this, but there are a couple of quite important errors.

I have only received a "blitz" of regulatory complaints if 8 complaints makes a blitz. But more importantly, I have never been investigated by the Bar Standards Board: all of those complaints (some about "misgendering") have been dismissed at triage stage.

And I am wrongly credited with acting for @MForstater in her ground-breaking discrimination claim that has done so much to empower gender ideology dissenters (including me) to speak up at work."

This is a shockingly poor article, riddled with errors. I hope those named will complain.

Another gift token in case anyone needs it:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/b245024f8fe416e8

I thought there were some important and useful points in among the errors, such as the bizarreness of lawyers handwaving away the SC judgment. I hope the article can be corrected.

Yeah, it has flaws, but at least people are talking about it more. Any publicity helps.

At the end of day it might mean more seeds for Sarah, Allison etc to fight their cases. That is the vital thing.

Pro Women lawyers are going to keep doing their thing, whether or not the media report it accurately or not.

The tide is coming in.

Eesh.

Are the editors and usual journos all on holiday or something?

He can't even get Allison Bailey's name right (she has two l's). Plus the general lower-quality than the DT usually writes on this topic. It seems this is his first piece on the topic.

Very powerful image used.