Lorna Young v Manchester City Council, Employment Tribunal, May 2026

[Mmmnotsure]

Lorna Young is taking her former employer, Manchester City Council, to Employment Tribunal. The case began today. It is being live tweeted by Tribunal Tweets https://x.com/tribunaltweets
and coverage is also available on their Substack
https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/lorna-young-vs-manchester-city-council

Lorna Young was Equality Team Manager at MCC. She was dismissed, among other grounds, for her social media activity.

Lorna Young is gender critical and Catholic, and opposes surrogacy. She is claiming unfair dismissal, and discrimination and harassment because of religion or belief, and disability.

Tribunal Tweets (@tribunaltweets) | nitter.poast.org
for non X-ers

Thank you, I didn’t know about this.

Thank you. I must send TT a bob or two.

Thanks for the heads up - will be following

Thanks - good to know. But sad that yet another woman is having to use the law to protect her rights.

I hadn't heard of this one but I had heard of another GC complaint involving MCC although I don't think it is public / tribunal stage yet. Interesting if there is actually more than one.

Tribunal Tweets:

‘LY claims:
(a) Direct discrimination because of religion or belief;
(b) Harassment related to religion or belief;
(c) Discrimination arising from disability;
(d) Harassment related to disibility;
(e) Unfair dismissal.’

TT:

‘Abbrevs:
LY or C - Lorna Young, the Claimant
MCC or R - Manchester City Council, the Respondent
NR - Nathan Roberts, counsel for C
Aileen McColgan KC - counsel for R
AP - C's solicitor at Leigh Day
AM - Aileen McColgan KC, counsel for R
AP - Annie Powell of Leigh Day, C's solicitor
GC - gender critical
GI(T) - gender identity (theory)’

TT:

‘The employment judge for this hearing is EJ Dunlop’

I googled the judge: ‘The Lord Chancellor, The Right Honourable David Gauke MP, has appointed Joanne Elizabeth Dunlop to be a Salaried Employment Judge of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales). Joanne Elizabeth Dunlop will be assigned to the North West Region in the principal hearing centre Manchester with effect from 16th September 2019.’

www.judiciary.uk/appointments-and-retirements/appointment-of-a-salaried-employment-judge-of-the-employment-tribunals-england-and-wales-dunlop/

This judge doesn’t mince her words. I found this from one of her other cases:

“I make no bones about the fact that I had not (and have not) read every
word of Mr Wlochinski’s rebuttal document nor, indeed, of the underlying
documents in the bundle in reaching that decision. Much of what is
contained in his correspondence, and in his rebuttal document, comprises
bombastic legal hyperbole with little reference to the substantive facts of
this case. Whilst superficially erudite, it lacks reasoning and is endlessly
repetitive. I suspect – although of course I have been unable to ask Mr
Wlochinski [he didn’t turn up to the hearing] – that it results at least in part from a use of AI generated
material with little attempt to edit or filter the result. It is not a proportionate
use of Tribunal resources for a Judge to spend the hours and hours that it
would take to engage with such a document on a line-by-line basis.”

Ouch.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/694172d62d5e7e8632537547/Mr_G_Wlochinski_v_English_Lakes_Hotels_Limited_-6035029_2025-_Judgment.pdf

Being GC for a council such as Manchester is incredibly difficult. Watching this with great internet.

This is quite hard to follow on X but it looks like there's a lot of collusion between complainants, failure to disclose appropriate documents and monitoring of personal twitter account. All very familiar.

There is an interesting point made about if a council passes a motion saying “TWAW” can GC staff express their legally held beliefs that sex is immutable within that context? And how dies TWAW now sit in context of Supreme Court judgement?

Isn't that where the Forestater case would be the guidelines.

Even if a Council (ie the politicians) passes a motion as an employer they would have to abide by the ruling that GC views are "worhty of respect" and that employers need to treat each belief set equally.

Although of course in real life we know that most councils ignore Court rulings.

Indeed. But if I worked for such a council I would keep my GC beliefs absolutely beneath the radar.

Late disclosures again! Interesting intervention by judge at end of yesterdays session

Looks like more missing disclosures and HR staff embarrassing themselves.

HR rep currently unable to clearly articulate the reasons for dismissal …apparently it was “complex” and “wasn’t straightforward” 🙄

Interesting bit here:- ‘ “would trans residents have confidence in the EDI manager” - Trans residents didn’t know about the tweets though, because the account was anonymous. ‘

Is there some rule that witnesses are not allowed to refresh their memories of their part in a process by going over their own paperwork? Or is this a deliberate tactic so they can say “I don’t recall” to any inconvenient questions?

I just cannot imagine not doing my own homework to prepare for at ET if I were a witness. Obviously it would be wrong to discuss with other witnesses but surely going over one’s own paperwork, emails and messages would be ok?

I've been at a few of these ETs now and I've been shocked at the lack of prep by the respondents. I don't know if they can go through their own witness statements etc beforehand but, in their shoes, I would be thinking about what I might be questioned on and what I should read etc to make sure I didn't look like a right tit.

They often seem smugly complacent ('on the right side of history' no doubt). However, an hour of questioning from Naomi Cunningham shows them how foolish they've been.

@Rightsraptor I would absolutely do the same, I would go through my own records so I was sure of the timeline of my own involvement and didn’t make myself look like an idiot ….but of course if I knew I had fucked up or knew that as an organisation we had started a process with a predetermined outcome already decided then perhaps it would be best to look like a tit and not do any preparation. 🤷‍♀️

it appears that so many elements of this process have been hidden, not recalled, not disclosed.

is it usual to ask for strike out midway through the tribunal and am unclear about Judge’s reference to ‘public hearing’ in final comments…

I had missed this one, sorry, so I will bring myself up to speed today.