Thread by @tribunaltweets

Good Morning. We are reporting from the First Tier Tribunal of the General Regulatory Chamber today in day 1 of Mermaids v Charity Commission of England and Wales and the LGB Alliance.

Mermaids (@Mermaids_Gender) have bought the matter to challenge the decision of the @ChtyCommission to award LGB Alliance (@ALLIANCELGB) its charity status in April 2021. See gov.uk/government/pub….

We understand this is the first time one charity has sought to remove charitable status from another.

** Following the death of HM The Queen yesterday we understand proceedings are still expected to go ahead as planned but the tribunal may commence with a 2 minute silence and will observe any period of national silence as directed by the Government **

Abbreviations:
Presiding Judge, Judge Lynn Griffin: J or Judge
Assisted by Judge Joe Neville: AJ, J or Judge

Mermaids counsel is Michael Gibbon KC - MG

LGB Alliance counsel is Karon Monaghan KC - KM
Karon is assisted by Akua Reindorf - AR
Charity Commission counsel is Iain Steele - IS

Further abbreviations TBC

The hearing is expected to start at 10.00am.

We will need to be given formal permission to live-tweet proceedings, which we have requested and hope will be granted at the outset.

The session is beginning. We will tweet further when we have been given permission to do so.

Some background: this is a "hybrid" hearing, meaning that remote viewers including us are watching a live-stream of the courtroom rather than it being a fully on-line "conference call" format.

We find that it is sometimes hard to identify who is speaking in this format because many individuals have their backs to the camera; so we apologise in advance for any mistakes we make in this respect.

We are still waiting for the Judges to enter the court - the hearing does not formally begin until that point.

We are still waiting for the judges.

The Judges are now present; we will live-tweet if permission is given, but will wait till then.

{We are still waiting for permission]

[The court is still dealing with procedural matters and has not yet given permission to live-tweet]

The Court has given permission for live-tweeting; that will be kept under review in case of any abuse of the permission. Reporting must be accurate. Must be done appropriately and in compliance with law and court directions, and must not impact on the Court's proceeding.

Court expects any errors in reporting that *are* made will be swiftly corrected.
Court will not monitor or police, but others can bring such matters to the court attention if necessary.

J: Reminder to all remote viewers to mute please.

MG: Note that there are no issues re amendments to witness statements 2/9.

J: Court will retire to consider the admin/procedural questions and matters brought this morning. Will advise about 2pm whether we will rule orally today or whether we will rule on Monday

MG: We could consider now, to use the time, some Qs that don't require witness evidence?
J: Indeed - parties please consider what matters can be handled today.

KM: I understand that MG intends to lay out statutory framework, if not controversial then will be helpful.

MG: Hope not controversial.

MG: First Q is whether LGBAlliance is genuinely a charity; this is the first legal issue.
MG: This is not a case about lawfulness of anything LGBA has done.
MG: Not Mermaids' case that tribunal must rule on difficult points of equality law

MG: We have responsiblity at the bar to deal mutually respectfully and am sure we all of us will. There are contentious issues will be put, but we will all do so professionally and respectfully.

MG: Hope none of that controversial.

MG: Moving to the list of issues.

MG: Qs are re LGBA in context of the Charities act
MG: Esp re political activities, are they within charitable purposes.
MG: And are there disbenefits that outweigh any benefits

MG: And what are effects and potential effects of CC registration on the appellant. This is the Q of standing of Mermaids.

MG: CharityCommission position is that it is here to assist the Tribunal and not to intervene in differences between my client and LGBA

MG: [Authorities bundle reference]
MG: 2011 Charity Act - defines what a charity is. "Charitable purposes only".
MG: Then defines "charitable purposes". Means, for public benefit.

MG: Includes: prevention/relief of poverty, provision of education, advancement of religion - plus a number of further examples.
MG: Specifically refer to h). Advancement of human rights

MG: Before this Act charity definition was less formal, done by courts, the first three well-established but "the fourth head" included a range of other items. 2011 Act tries to formalise / clarify. And extend a bit - recognising developments in society.

MG: point h) is one of these.

MG: Turning to "public benefit".
MG: Provisions amount to, charities now on a more formal footing since the Act, but, the Act was not intending to *change* the previous law.

MG: Section 30. Is re registration. Every charity must be registered.
MG: S36: deals with objections to registration. A person affected can object on grounds that this is *not* in fact a charity and can apply for removal.

MG: And can appeal if CC does not remove.
MG: there is provision for suspension also
MG: S37 says a body is "not a charity" if suspended.

MG: S139 deals with appeals. Who can bring.
MG: Charity Commission is respondent.

MG: Schedule 6: deals with applications to tribunal. Who can bring, tribunal powers.

MG: includes "any other person who is or may be affected" as who can bring. This is where my client are.

MG: That's my outline of legislation.

KM: One thing to say. MG said tribunal would not have to consider issues of equality law, but I think that is not the case. Looking at Mermaids Grounds Of Appeal. Paragraph 12.

KM: Says "do not satisfy public benefit, only about LGB people who are not transgender and who agree with LGB Alliance, this is not adequate".
KM: We dispute this, but in any case LGB people are a discrete group and able to organise on that basis.

KM: And Mermaids skeleton argument: paragraph 17.
KM: They mention equalities and discrimination law, the Equality Act, they refer to various documents, and ask whether LGBA is mis-interpreting the Equality Act and/or omitting transgender people who are L, G or B.

KM: We say, Mermaids have misunderstood section 7 of EA2010, and will need to argue this.
KM: We also say, will need to consider issue of protected beliefs under EA2010.

KM: So will need to be - not disproportionate - discussion of this. WOuld not wish tribunal to be under impression this will not come up.

MG: Our submission was not that the issues won't come up, but that they will not be relevant to this appeal.

KM: I felt it would be improper to let the tribunal "park" this thinking it would not come up.

MG: Was attempting to provide a neutral outline.

[interruption because a phone has gone off in court]

J: Judge Neville and I will now retire to consider, and will be in touch to say how we will proceed.

[END OF SESSION]

We are expecting that the Court will reconvene around 2pm either to rule on some or all of the procedural matters raised this morning (before permission to live-tweet was given) or to say that judgment is being reserved and will be made later.

It has already been agreed that no witness evidence will be heard today.

Clerk: The court will resume at 10.00am, when the Court will rule on the outstanding administration matters.
Clerk: email the court if you want to have access to the remote hearing then.
Clerk: There should be fewer problems then.

[END OF THE DAY'S HEARING]

@threadreaderapp please unroll