We at @GoodLawProject have a paralegal attending the case management hearing in the Tavistock's appeal in the Bell case on behalf of our trans defence fund. Occasional updates from them as the hearing progresses...
The 'stay' - effectively a suspension of the legal effect of the first instance decision - will continue. That has been agreed between the parties.
Judge doesn't want oral submissions from any of the would-be intervenors at the case management hearing. (I wouldn't read anything in to that.)
Counsel for Bell opposes - I hope I have that right - the joint intervention.
They support the application from Dr Bell (no relation to Keira Bell but a supporter of the Divisional Court's decision).
A slight sense of Mandy Rice Davies about these submissions (from both sides).
The NHS Trusts just want it all done quickly.
(I don't apologise to trans-interest followers for my procurement content so I'm not apologising for procurement followers for the trans content. It's a heterodox feed: what can I say?)
Sorry, long and badly timed phone call. Now catching up at the end of the hearing.
So, tl;dr. @Genderintell, @BrookCharity and @TheEndoSociety have been given permission to intervene. As have various others including UCLH and Leeds, Transgender Trend, and the aforementioned Dr Bell.
The expectation seems to be that the full hearing of the appeal will be before the end of April.
A slightly disappointing outcome, I would say. Good bits: the joint intervention was given permission; the Court appreciated the need for urgency. Bad bits: no fresh evidence and we only got permission to make submissions on paper.
(Litigation isn't a sentiment game so there is really no incentive to be anything other than completely realistic about your assessment of how a hearing goes.)
Am told everything should be "ready to go" by the end of April. So hearing may be shortly thereafter.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Another extraordinary development in our judicial review of Government's decision to award lucrative antibody test contracts to Abingdon Health. ft.com/content/272a49…
We have previously written about how Government has - there is no polite way to put this - lied about what it bought from Abingdon Health. goodlawproject.org/update/trying-…
We expect to make further, shocking, disclosures about Government and Abingdon's conduct in this case in the coming days and weeks.
Abingdon is one of the worst cases of Government misconduct I have seen (we could do with some help in pursuing it). crowdjustice.com/case/abingdon-…
If the question whether it is right to appoint your mates to key public sector roles without competition depends on an after the event assessment on how well you think they've performed, will the Government now apologise for appointing Dido Harding to lead Test & Trace?
Of course they won't.
Not a day passes without me being appalled afresh by the utter moral bankruptcy of this Government.
It's not some preposterous utopia to believe that jobs of immense national importance, power and prestige shouldn't be the preserve of those who are friends or relatives of the Government.
We await a permission decision on our judicial review challenge to Government cronyism.
*Repeats plea ad infinitum for @barstandards to be permitted to prioritise the regulatory objective of protecting and promoting the public interest.*
I make this point, as always I do, in the context of a political opponent being threatened with @barstandards referral for words or actions of theirs I find reprehensible but the principal control mechanism for which rests elsewhere in the law.*
The fact of @barstandards being asked to enter the political sphere can carry an implied criticism should it fail then to do so. That criticism can weaken its ability to perform the regulatory function which only it can perform of protecting against bad barristering.
I didn't know it then, but the New Zealand I was a child in was a closed economy, shuttered behind all sorts of barriers, based in geography and trade law.
Through my remembered eyes, there was much good about it. For example, there was a huge domestic craft pottery industry, whose wares were used across all social classes, who were almost all wiped out by cheap Japanese imports when trade barriers came down.
Almost all, except for a few who displayed the stubbornness that is the mark of a true New Zealander. Like this man whose modest domestic ware has now come back into fashion but we use at home because it's nice to eat off plates made by human hand. paulmelser.co.nz/pottery/
Remember Andrew Mills? Liz Truss advisor, architect of the VIP lane red carpet to riches Ayanda deal which involved the NHS blowing £155m on unusable facemasks?
We explained in this thread how the deal involved us paying up to £166m over and above the prices we were paying to other mask suppliers (which of course themselves embedded huge profits).
Remember Tim Horlick, owner of Ayanda, saying "I am not at liberty to disclose" how much profit he was making "but it will be in our accounts in due course"?
(Of course he is "at liberty to disclose" it. He just doesn't want to.)
I'm more interested in who will save our country from corrupt politics.
Good distraction though.👆
Robert Jenrick’s constituency was awarded funding by his department as part of a process that was opaque and not impartial. thetimes.co.uk/article/robert…