Good morning, we are at the Employment Tribunal today for day 1 of Denise Fahmy v Arts Council England (ACE). Denise claims she was victimised and harassed due to her gender critical beliefs.
The alleged detriments occurred after Denise spoke in support of ACE awarding a grant to the LGB Alliance @AllianceLGB
We have been told there will be no remote access to the hearing, observers must attend in person. We have made a formal application for permission to live tweet proceedings. We understand this request will be addressed by the Judge when the hearing starts #OpenJustice
Key abbreviations
EJ or J: Employment Judge Shepherd
DF: Denise Fahmy, claimant
AC: Arts Council England, respondent
AP: Anya Palmer, barrister for DF
AM: Aileen McColgan KC, barrister for AC
Permission to live-tweet may be contested / discussed and so we shall not be tweeting on the assumption that permission is a given; we are sorry that we shall not be able to relay any of that discussion as it happens.
We shall tweet when the Judge has decided whether to grant, or to refuse, us permission.
A journalist from the Telegraph challenged the Judge about access to the bundles in the name of open justice. He said this case is in the public interest therefore journalists must have access and be able to live report proceedings accurately
The Judge asked the parties to discuss and come to an agreement. Arts Council barrister was concerned about witnesses being identified and asked for redactions. Judge told both parties to consider and come back and let him know. We are now on a three and half hour reading break
When we return after lunch, we will know whether we will be allowed to have access to the bundles and whether we have permission to live tweet. Telegraph journalist is considering whether to get their barrister involved if the Judge does not allow access
We are back! We are going to be given the redacted bundle.
Claimant's evidence will be tomorrow, respondent's evidence Monday or Tuesday
The judge is going to discuss with the panel and has not made any decision re permission to live tweet. We are now done for the day and will reconvene in the morning
Afternoon session begins.
AM - you didn't complain about SM immediately after the Teams meeting because you were worried about consequences. The first part of your response - you are quite robust, you tick him, one side of the argument, didn't foster a good environment,
AM - thats not a person who is afraid to express views.
DF - it was robust but it was my pride speaking. I did feel that I couldn't at that point raise an objection to how he behaved because I wouldn't have been supported.
AM - but you did raise an objection to his behaviour.
DF - I was intimidated by the meeting, by the hostile environment.
AM - I suggest to you that there's no distinction between the workplace complaint and the whistle blowing complaint ex post facto.
DF - I didn't complain at the time but I was very upset.
Good morning, we are at the Employment Tribunal today for day 2 of Denise Fahmy v Arts Council England (ACE). Denise claims she was victimised and harassed due to her gender critical beliefs.
We are not yet certain we will be given permission to live tweet.
Abbreviations:
EJ or J: Employment Judge Shepherd
DF: Denise Fahmy, claimant
AC: Arts Council England, respondent
AP: Anya Palmer, barrister for DF
AM: Aileen McColgan KC, barrister for AC
We will either live tweet if given permission or take detailed notes and tweet as and when we are allowed.
We hope today to be tweeting the second (and final) day of Clare Page's appeal against the ICO - our Substack page on the case, including the evidence heard last week, is here: tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/foi-appeal-t…
Today will be closing submissions from the two barristers:
ZG = Zoe Gannon, counsel for
CP = Clare Page, the appellant
ICO = the Information Commissioner's Office, the respondent, is not represented.
We are reporting for the first time from a Disciplinary Tribunal Panel of the Institute & Faculty of Actuaries (IFoA) this morning at 10am.
The independent panel will hear submissions & decide if the IFoA has the legal right to discipline former member, Patrick Lee. #OpenJustice
The substantive issues on freedom of speech relating to complaints about social media posts Patrick Lee made whilst he was an member will not be considered today.
The issue today is whether IFoA Rule 4.4 of the Disciplinary Scheme is invalidated by Bye-Laws 27 (any Rule “contrary to, or different from” the Bye-Laws shall be “invalid"), & 59, which does not refer to former members.
New thread when we return to the session at 12.05.
Those present are Clare Page (CP) - mother who made the complaint about School of Sexuality Education (SSE)
Zoe Gannon (ZG) counsel for CP
Susan Wright (SW) counsel for SSE
Dolly Padalia (DP) CEO of SSE
Judge Buckley (JB)
We are back. JB is discussing emails requesting the bundles by observers
JB is asking counsel if they are happy for us to have access to the bundles for reporting purposes