Good morning. This is Jenny Smith @GoodyActually who will be tweeting from the Employment Tribunal hearing of Maya Forstater against The Center for Global Development (CGD)

There are three respondents: CGD Europe, CGD itself, and Masood Ahmed, President of CGD.
Counsel for Maya Forstater is Ben Cooper QC assisted by Anya Palmer (both of Old Square Chambers).

Counsel for the respondents is Olivia Dobbie, Cloisters.
The hearing begins today and is scheduled to end on 22nd March. We expect to begin with any case-management discussions this morning; the court will then retire for reading days for the rest of today and for tomorrow, with witness appearances starting Wednesday 9th March.
Proceedings are likely to start around 10:00 a.m.

BC = Ben Cooper QC, counsel for MF = Maya Forstater
AP = Anya Palmer, assisting BC
OD = Olivia Dobbie, counsel for the respondents
EJ = Employment judge, leading the three-person panel hearing the case.
Panel = any one of the three members
CGD = Centre for Global Development. It is likely that our tweeting may occasionally mix up CGD and CGDE (CGD Europe), both of whom are respondents, but we hope not in any significant way.

MA = Masood Ahmed, President of CGD and Chair of the Board of CGDE
We are waiting for the video link to activate.

This hearing is taking place completely online; the panel, witnesses and barristers are all participating via video conferencing, as well as observers.
The Clerk to the court is introducing the hearing, and outlining the rules of remote hearings.
We need formal permission to live-tweet so I will wait for that point before tweeting further.
We now have permission to live-tweet from the court.
The court has previously discussed some paperwork issues - a list of agreed points between claimant and respondent is outstanding and will be supplied to the court later today.
Now discussing time-tabling.

Responsdents have applied for some reporting restrictrions: EJ feels that this application would be better discussed once the Court has read all documentation, so that they know what the effect of any restrictions would be
BC: describing his expectation of time needed re witnesses and closing arguments.
BC: re the reporting restriction order: had hoped that would be dealt with this morning? Not least because re open justice and document publicishing
OD: agrees with BC's analysis of timings needed.

OD: disagrees with BC, documents can't be published until court has read them, wait to discuss order Weds.
BC: Understands order requires anonymising via ciphering of anyone mentioned. This affects immediately "in case" order is granted. Plus: can't do any redacting if needed (big job) until order decided
EJ: notes that there are 2 half-days will be lost to panel commitments not factored in yet
EJ: notes much press interest

EJ: timetabling is problematic. At best Court will be able to hear evidence but will have no deliberation time and will have to schedule deliberations for an unknown future time
OD: apologises for late coming-up of the restrictions order etc. Suggests strict timing of oral evidence?
EJ: Tribunal members need to retire and consider things, not least with view to setting timetable

BC: no view on whether whole panel or EJ only should decide reporting restrictions application

OD: agrees

EJ: but hearing of it should be in public hearing
BC: indeed, but it would be necessary to discuss individuals DURING the application ... could be tricky

EJ: so perhaps restricted reporting DURING it. Hmmm
EJ: checks all witnesses are in the UK
OD: yes
[note that CGD is an international body so this was not a given]
EJ: court will adjourn until 11 am so panel can discuss case timings.

OD: we do now have agreed chronology and cast list, will send in now.
OD: notes some bundling marking-up that may cause page number glitches - apologies in advance. Perhaps claimaints can help here?
EJ: Am sure we will muddle through
BC: Documents will be the same even if different "versions" [think this just means, printed at a different time etc]
EJ confirms will be OK on the day is sure

OD: MF did an interview with Guardian - Jonathan Glennie, NB same surname as EJ, related?

EJ: Not that I know of!

[Adjournment until 11.00]
[One addition: when reporting restrictions were being discussed before live-tweeting had been formally permitted, EJ read out a contribution from the Court's online chat room as follows: >
"Luke O'Reilly (journalist) in the chat states: "The Press Association would like to make it known that we will be challenging any reporting restrictions, and we will need time for our lawyers to prepare our submission" ]
Court is resuming now.
EJ: Panel will read into the case today and tomorrow as scheduled. Reporting restrictions will be discussed / determined by full panel not just EJ. And this will happen on Wednesday.
EJ: re publishing document: protocol is that a witness statement is only published once the witness starts to give evidence. It seems to panel that documents remain *out* of public domain until public hearing of that witness takes place.
BC: Of course, re witness statements. But, what about barrister opening submissions - they could be [cites precedent]? However moot here, because cannot happen until reporting restriction Q decided.
EJ: Agrees: for now we need temporary reporting restriction.

EJ: And re timetable: No we don't think that restricting evidence or final submission is acceptable. So we panel have looked at diaries and we think we should reserve a week in future [earliest date is May]
EJ: in case we need further *court* time as opposed to deliberation / chambers time

BC: availability very problematic - he cannot offer availability until January 2023 - so we do, please, have to finish hearing this week.
BC: And I will be arguing strongly re reporting restrictions that it's not acceptable to use up the limited time we do have on such a sweeping and very late application. Not acceptable that it should damage the hearing.
OD: Does think the scheduled timetable will work, possibly with single day slippage, we could then do curtailed barrister closing statement but with more substantial *written* submissions for the court. Timetable should still be workable.
EJ: It does seem as if we *must* hear all evidence during the current session.

OD: agrees

BC: agrees, except that OD had suggested that AP could stand in when he is not available; this does not seem right, MF should have her choice of counsel throughout.
EJ: So. We will not gain from me wittering about time while time is short. Court will resume 10:00 Wednesday; we expect to spend Wednesday on the restrictions application.

EJ: Monday will be morning-only.

EJ: Can we bring Friday 18th back into play?
BC: Friday 18th was bcs he has other case hearing to attend but it *may* be pre-agreed and is not likely to last all day; we could well be able to use at least some of 18th
EJ: Thank you. If OD & BC can squeeze the schedule to assist that is helpful.

OD/BC concur
BC: Re restrictions application: OD mentions a recent email, please clarify. We do not even have a draft order at present. We do not know what application actually is in fact.

Pls issue direction that respondent submits draft application by 4pm today
BC: draws attention to Press Association intervention; would be useful to have their response in advance of Wednesday.
EJ: If *anyone* is seeking to intervene this should be done ASAP

OD: yes can do draft application for 4pm.

EJ: notes that Luke O'Reilly has offered skeleton argument, thank you, yes please send in
BC / EJ confirm hard copy of authorities bundle will be sent shortly

EJ: Court adjourns until 10:00 am Wednesday
[And the video court conference call has now ended]

@threadreaderapp please unroll

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Tribunal Tweets at #ForstaterTribunal

Tribunal Tweets at #ForstaterTribunal Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @tribunaltweets

Feb 14
Good afternoon and welcome back to Day 6, the final day of Raquel Rosario Sanchez's case against Bristol University. Proceedings due to start at 2pm. Catch up with this morning here:


Another reminder of abbreviations: Alice de Coverly (AC) barrister to claimant Raquel Rosario Sanchez (RRS),
Laura Johnson (LJ), barrister to Bristol University (BU)
Alexander Ralton (AR), Judge

The court has begun.
LJ is continuing her submission about and a offers a case that comes become Tindle.
LJ is looking at [cases: Michael's and Robinson] about Duty of care and assumption of responsibility.
Read 95 tweets
Feb 14
Good morning and welcome to Day 6, the final day of Raquel Rosarino Sanchez's case against Bristol University. We're expecting closing submissions and then judgement will be reserved. We're waiting to begin.


Catch up with Day 5 here:
A reminder that Alice De Coverley (AC) is barrister for Raquel Rosario Sanchez (RRS)
Laura Johnson (LJ) is barrister for Bristol University (BU)
The Judge is Alexander Ralton (AR).

Witnesses who may be referred to are: Keith Feeney (KF), Jutta Weldes (JW), Laura Trescothick-Martin (LTM)

Read 68 tweets
Feb 11
Good afternoon & welcome back to the afternoon session of Day 5 of #RaquelvBristoluni. The court is due to start at 2pm. We hope technical difficulties will be kept to a minimum and thank you for bearing with us. Catch up with this morning here:

Another reminder of abbreviations: Alice de Coverly (AC) barrister to claimant Raquel Rosario Sanchez (RRS),
Laura Johnson (LJ), barrister to Bristol University (BU)
Alexander Ralton (AR), Judge
Jutta Weldes (JW), Witness
JW is in the witness box and we are waiting for court to begin.
Read 50 tweets
Feb 11
Good morning and welcome to Day 5 of @8RosarioSanchez case against Bristol University. The court adjourned early yesterday for the claimant's team to digest new documents, catch up here:
A reminder that Alice de Coverly (AC) is barrister for Raquel Rosmarino Sanchez (RRS) and Laura Johnson (LJ) is barrister for Bristol Uni (BU). The Judge is Alexander Ralton (AR) The court is due to start at 10.30.
Senior University Lawyer, Keith Feeney (KF) is in the Witness box and will continue to give evidence. We're just waiting to get underway.
Read 73 tweets
Feb 10
The afternoon session of Day 4 of #RaquelvBristolUni will start shortly. Please note, the witness Keith Feeney, referred to as 'Witness' in the morning session, will now be referred to as KF.
AR reminds KF he is still under oath. AC states an 80 page document concerning AA, has landed on her desk during the lunch hour. She has not had time to go through the full document. AC regrets she needs time to take instructions and digest the disclosure that has arrived.
AR: let us hear from LJ
LJ: I've been clear that AC should have time and it's been a mistake at our end. It's the emails generated to committee members about the dates and about security. That's the nature of the disclosure. I've said we're very sorry this has happened.
Read 14 tweets
Feb 10
Good morning on Day 4 of the case of Raquel Rosarino Sanchez against Bristol University. The court is due to begin at 10am.

A reminder that Alice De Coverley (AC) is barrister for Raquel (RRS) and Laura Johnson (LJ) is barrister for Bristol. The Judge is Alexander Ralton (AR).
This is my first time live tweeting this case and I'd ask you bear with me as I find my feet. Apologies in advance for any typos or mistakes, I'm sure you can appreciate the speed at which we're working.
AR asks for witness back in box. AC asks about press requests. AC is asking if the witness statement has gone out to them, and if it hasn't yet we want to make it watertight in protecting AA.
Read 79 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!