Thread 2 AB vs SW

IO: A diff ET may have made a different decision doesnt mean this ET was wrong
LW: Unless they erred in law. IO: If the parties had put an approach as to how provisions should be interpreted you cant go back on that
LN: I do follow but its really about the language of causation and its not obvious to me we are helped on that

Good morning. The appeal of Allison Bailey v Stonewall re-starts this morning at 10.30am. The proceedings will also be live-streamed here:
youtube.com/@RoyalCourtsof… Our substack page for the case can be found here: tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/allison-bail…

Allison Bailey’s skeleton argument: allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/upl…
Stonewall’s skeleton argument will be added to our substack should it become publicly available.

Continued this afternoon's session IO Just in relation to the question asked about para 369 it is my submission is that the ET findings of fact for better or worse what is recorded there is what they heard and accepted and drew from it.

The Appeal of Allison Bailey v Stonewall Equality Ltd re-starts this afternoon at 13.55. The proceedings will also be live-streamed here:

youtube.com/@RoyalCourtsof… BCRight and common ground that the term cause doesn't imply a conscious motive on the part of person A and that must be right or it would be inconsistent with emp law.
It is necessary to analyse the scope of obligation to find what the defend ought to be held for
the eat is wron

The Appeal of Allison Bailey v Stonewall Equality Ltd starts at 1030 at the Royal Courts of Justice and will be live tweeted here.

The proceedings will also be live-streamed here:

youtube.com/@RoyalCourtsof… Co-respondents are Garden Court Chambers, Rajiv Menon KC and Stephanie Harrison KC of GCC

The Panel are: Lord Justice Bean, Lord Justice Newey and Lady Justice Whipple

Key legal documents can be found here

tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/allison-bail…

Giggle v Tickle Appeal Day 3 (Part 2 second part of morning) Federal Court case NSD1386/2024 Giggle for Girls & Anor v Roxanne Tickle. Heard by Full Bench of Australian Federal Court 4-7 August 2025. Livestreamed here: Equality Aus:
Given that the stat is always speaking, what ordinary meaning changes over time.
Re GI, that speaks at the end of designated sex at birth. The text shows designation of sex is a social act, performed by someone on behalf of someone else on the basis of markers.

Giggle vs Tickle Federal Court appeal Day 3 Part 1. GC JP asked a qeustion yesterday about purpose (or Purvis?)- definition of appropriate comparator. refers to another case in Qld (missed section). Qld 2018 decision. the court of appeal extracts definition of disability in Purvis before High court. concept of disability "resulting" in disturbed beahviour. 2 components of reasoning 1/ disability. 2/comparator

Day 2, part 2: Tribunal tweets for Federal Court case NSD1386/2024 Giggle for Girls & Anor v Roxanne Tickle. Heard by Full Bench of Australian Federal Court 4-7 August 2025. Livestreamed here. . Justices Perry, Kennett and Abraham presiding (JP, JK, JA)youtube.com/live/ru6pc2tGK… Back after lunch. NH responds to GC suggestion about new arguments being put. 7D1a is the grounds relied upon. Bromwitch constructed the case as indirect discrimination which meant SG's team's case was not explored in detail. It was a special measure - as was argued.

Giggle v Tickle appeal Monday morning part 2. (Opening remarks missed but seems the new ground will be dealt with “as they come to it”). GC some arguments no longer pressed (missed which ones). NH we propose to look at the history of various provisions. Then proceed to appeal grounds: namely, the question of gender identity, the true meaning in the Act of the word sex, and woman, and man. Section 7d and b and section 5(??) of the Act. Then deal with appeal grounds 1-3

These are the Tribunal tweets for Federal Court case NSD1386/2024 Giggle for Girls & Anor v Roxanne Tickle. Heard by Full Bench of Australian Federal Court 4-7 August 2025. Livestreamed here. .
Justices Perry, Kennett and Abraham presiding (JP, JK, JA)youtube.com/live/ru6pc2tGK… Giggle v Tickle appeal Monday afternoon part 3

Kenny McBride is in court today to appeal the outcome of claim of unfair dismissal. Tribunal Tweets has permission to live tweet the proceedings. It is expected to begin at 2 pm today. Our previous reporting of his tribunal can be found here.
open.substack.com/pub/tribunaltw…

R - Key witness is RH - that person is not available in September.

[dates discussion]

J - normally claimants go first - to interpose R's witness at first would be undesirable.

C - it's ceremonial. It doesn't make a lot of practical difference. R - ET will need a couple of days to read. Cross exam of RH will take {a couple of days].

J understands C needs to speak to counsel - wants to get dates listed as soon as possible.

[dates discussion continues - and availability of claimants]

County Durham & Darlington NHS Foundation Trust has applied to suspend the management directions & adjourn the Darlington nurses tribunal, which is listed for 16/6- 4/7.

Regional Employment Judge Robertson has given us permission to attend the 10am remote preliminary hearing. We are a volunteer collective of citizen journalists reporting legal cases on freedom of speech and belief.

Please subscribe to our stack (link in bio) for the media coverage and daily court reports. Paid subscriptions support our work.

#OpenJustice

Welcome to the afternoon session of DAY 7 of ex-primary school teacher 'A' v Nottingham County Council

'A' claims victimisation for whistleblowing & unfair dismissal for refusing to 'socially transition' a pupil

1.45pm start
Find previous reports/info on our substack (link ⬇️)

'A' was formerly referred to as 'Hannah' in 2024 case - which collapsed after a panel member's social media content was alleged to indicate anti-religious bias. This was later confirmed after a judicial conduct investigation in August 2024.tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/hannah-v-a-p…

We are live-tweeting (now over from the Tribunal Tweets 1 account) from the morning session, day 6 of the rehearing of ‘A’ v Nottingham County Council, starting at 11 am. Day 1 was a reading day. Note: The Claimant was referred to as ‘Hannah’ in the previous 2024 hearing.

We hope to resume at 15:45 for the final session of Randall vs Trent College, employment appeal tribunal. The appeal has been agreed by consent and the case will be returned to ET for a full re-hearing of the merits. The afternoon discussion has been on costs. Abbreviations
BR - Bernard Randall, former chaplain of Trent College
TC - Trent College, first respondent
JH - J Hallows, second respondent
JR - J Rimington, third respondent
JT - His Honour Judge Tayler, sitting alone

We will return shortly to Fr Bernard Randall appealing his unsuccessful employment tribunal result following his dismissal as chaplain of Trent College. RB is being used for the respondents barrister as we didn't have the name. Paul Wilson, the Mr Wilson from an earlier tweet, is RB.

We are waiting still.

Randall's appeal has been agreed by consent, the case will be returned to the Employment Tribunal. The parties are discussing draft directions to accompany the judgment. BR's counsel is seeking a change of location and a speedy hearing.
Hope to be back at 12 pm. Parties have returned.

NF - is BR's barrister
RB - Respondents Barrister (Paul WIllson)

NF- have agreement on a set of directions, for annexing to ruling. Not agreed change of venue. This tribunal has power to remit to former or a new tribunal. Seems no jump to remit to locatio

Fr Bernard Randall is at the Employment Appeals Tribunal today. Appealing his unsuccessful employment tribunal result following his dismissal as chaplain of Trent College. We hope to be reporting on the appeal from 10:30 Our previous coverage of the case is here:
Dr Randall alleges that he was discriminated against on the grounds of his religion and beliefs and unfairly dismissed. Trent College maintains that the role of chaplain was eliminated as a cost control measure.tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/bernard-rand…

PART 7. Day 2. Afternoon. DG (AHRC) closing.
DG: Oral submissions of AHRC complement written submission. Will take them in a classical way issue by issue. LH contends that there is a community of individuals who don’t want the applicant to have an exemption. He includes the AHRC. That is not the position of the AHRC, which has taken care to be impartial in responding to A case and respecting its statutory responsibilities. AHRC has expressed no view on what the outcome of this appeal should be, and has not said what the A can and cannot do in the tribunal

PART 6. Day 2, morning.
M How are we going for time?
LH I need till around 1.15 for closing statements
We are very grateful for accommodating LAG supporters in the room. LH [CLOSING STATEMENT] simple points 1/ LAG means no harm to anyone, 2/LAG wants the same human rights as offered to anyone, 3/ LAG is not seeking resources or anything else, 4/ there are others that do not want that to happen and that includes the AHRC.