Belief discrimination – take a “small claim” says Sex Matters!

[IwantToRetire]

If you are subjected to unlawful discrimination by a service provider, you can take what is known colloquially as a “small claim” to the county court.

This article relates to the law in England and Wales (in Scotland there is something similar called “simple procedure”).

Full details at https://sex-matters.org/practical-help/take-a-small-claim-for-belief-discrimination/

If you're going to criticise it as being "exploitative even", a strong criticism, did you read the article and watch the Youtube post? Because these things were addressed there, essential point by point: risks of losing, expectation of winning, strategic purpose of mass complaints and the current environment.

The rest of the thread is mostly you moving the goal posts about what the risks are and what's exploitative which reads very much as a dishonest attempt to confuse the situation rather than a good faith effort to clear up doubt, air concerns or criticize SM's modus operandi.

If you're imagining I don't think there's a problem with trans-identifying men using women's facilities, you're quite wrong. I think it's a huge issue. I welcome the SM suggestion and I support anyone who is discriminated against for the GC beliefs taking forward a claim. As far as I can see there are no downsides to any individual who does so.

On the other hand I don't think merely observing a man using the wrong toilet is going to rise to the level of securing damages in court. But if someone really thinks it does, I welcome them going forward.

If anyone does want to win a case in court they have to be able to state a case plainly in front of a sceptical audience. The first question will inevitably be 'how much money do you think you deserve to make you square'. Because that's the fundamental ask of any and every claim. If the claimant thinks asking 'how much' is somehow being clever then their claim isn't going to go far.

Ample Sheep is a regular poster and if I recall correctly a lawyer or legal adjacent.

It’s just questions that someone will get asked - it’s not undermining it’s practical.

What was the harm, how did it impact you, what’s the remedy? You can’t go to court if you don’t know what you’re asking for.

Fair enough to me.

That wasn't the intent in terms of post.

As I said I think to maybe list the issues you think this straight forward article appears to over look, just list them and forward them to SM.

In the context of the flow of the thread they read as trivialisation.

A good summary of all points would be more useful and obvious.

If SM can be professional, shouldn't we try?

Not a lawyer, but I have enjoyed 50 years of reading court judgments and other legal sources.

On the matter of harassment, somewhere there's a judgment that says people are expected to have a reasonably thick skin before turning to the law for remedy: not every insult rises to the level where a legal action is justified. I'll try to find it somewhere.

Being turned away from a venue for being Black, Muslim, or disabled is the harm which the EA2010 was designed to remedy. Similarly being turned away because of your legitimate GC beliefs. I'm not sure about the simple matter of seeing a man using a women's toilet. That's just my skepticism though.

I think that for a remedy one could ask the court to refund ticket price and travel costs for the day at the science museum that was disrupted by the man's behaviour and also ask that the museum updates its safeguarding and facilities policies, as well as staff training, to ensure that they are compliant with the SC ruling and subsequent EHRC code of practice.

These requests seem perfectly reasonable to me - what does the thread think?

I don't know about anyone else but the county court can't order specific performance of any of (the quite reasonable request that) the museum updates its safeguarding and facilities policies, as well as staff training, to ensure that they are compliant with the SC ruling and subsequent EHRC code of practice. None of that is in the court's jurisdiction.

There is a legal saying de minimis non curat lex - the law does not concern itself with trifles. I think that ticket price and travel costs is too small to trouble the County Court, and a judge would say so in no uncertain terms.

Naomi Cunningham tweeted regarding the Sex Matters guidance:

https://x.com/LoudBonnet/status/2060707029459624118?s=20

"Excellent. If your claim is a simple one, think about a DIY approach instead of paying (or crowdfunding) for lawyers.

^Years ago, I wrote a book (2nd-4th editions with co-author Michael Reed) about how to do DIY litigation in the employment tribunal: https://lag.org.uk/shop/products/202119/employment-tribunal-claims-tactics-and-precedents^

It's quite old now, and bits are out of date, but it's mostly still sound. All royalties go to the excellent Free Representation Unit in London, but it is quite expensive - if you need it, probably best borrow from your local library if you can.'

Thanks for the link, considering how many women are being sacked because of this batshittery it could come in handy too.

Thank you!

And they can't sue you for, say, defamation or something for taking a case against them?

You might have to pay their costs if you lose, is that right?

Yes it’s low risk of those things but no guarantee.

Most normal sensible people with a claim can try it.

It has to be a clear financial remedy for breach of law.

I am a lawyer - I understand people saying approach with caution. I’m not saying do not do it - but it’s not always a straightforward process and this stuff is still in a contested space.

However anyone who does it please let us know how it goes!

The SM guidance is about a letter before action to prompt settlement/apology/policy change. If that doesn’t work it’s Small Claims Court

It’s officially the “small claims track” in the County Court. A simplified County Court procedure for money claims under £10,000,

No you can never be sued for defamation for what you say about someone else in court. Anything put before a court - any claim, witness statement, anything said in court by a claimant, or witness, or defendant or judge or anyone else has absolute privilege and cannot form the basis of any suit. (If you think about it that’s the only thing that makes sense.)

Small claims track cases are awarded costs only in quite exceptional circumstances - this is discussed in the SM webpage. So even if you lose you will not have to pay any costs other than your own. And if you win you will not be awarded your own costs from the defendant. But if you represent yourself then you don’t have any costs beyond the court fee.

I don't think anyone that follows Sex Matters would have trouble reading these guidelines and making their own decisions at each pint in proceedings, based on their level of conviction, the degree of insult they've suffered, and their own personal circumstances. The target audience are self-selecting, their salient characteristic being that they are capable of critical though.

I am glad that I have this information at my disposal.

always worth a laugh https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1tsfq0t/found_this_linked_on_mumsnet_fighting_bigotry_in/

if I filled in a form to make a claim against the Science Museum or Park Run. Would my name become public?

Court proceedings would come at the end of the process, not at the start. Your name would be listed on hearings lists, but not the details of the claim, unless you or the other side published the details: think social media content like “I am going to court against the Science Museum” or “we, Park Run, are being sued by …”

Any hearing in court is open to the public and press. The Daily Mail would probably publish a short article about you if you won, and Pink News would probably do likewise, if you lost. Actually those two august journals would probably do the same either way.

It would make a decent headline, after all: Mumsnetter wins £300 damages against the Science Museum for seeing a trans-identifying man using the 5th floor women’s toilet: court agrees it left her distressed and ruined her day.”

Could I use a pseudonym?

No

You could ask for your name to be redacted, but you won't get it.

Crikey, that thread started from a position quite some way above the shark, and continued to ascend.

The Fonz would be proud

I started to read that thread, but found my brains started seeping out of my ears. You can't be filling your head with that nonsense!