Update #14 – The Stonewall judgment

I am sorry that I have not succeeded in my Appeal against Stonewall.

I am grateful to The Hon. Mr Justice Bourne for his reasoned judgment, although I am of course disappointed with the result.

I will consider the judgment with my legal team, but my initial view is that there are five key aspects of the judgment which are of concern.

Firstly, the judgment gives permission for organisations like Stonewall to procure the withdrawal of employment from people whose protected characteristics they disagree with, if this can be framed as a “protest”. This seems to go directly against the terms of the Equality Act.

Secondly, sight should not be lost of the fact that Stonewall, a charity set up to protect the legal rights of lesbians like me, should be the ones to limit workplace rights like this. How far they have fallen.

Thirdly, the judgment relies on the concept “fair or reasonable or just”. This is surprising because the judge heard no submissions on this from either party in the 2-day Appeal, and it didn’t feature at all in the 117-page employment appeal judgment or the 23-day employment appeal hearing.

Fourthly, the judgment appears self-contradictory. It gives various scenarios to justify its conclusion, at least one of which appears directly to confound that conclusion.

Fifthly, my case is about direct discrimination, but the judgment also considers indirect discrimination. There, it appears to establish that workplace policies of “Stonewall law” through the Diversity Champions scheme – e.g. the removal of single sex spaces – DOES in fact generate legal liability for Stonewall. This is a hollow victory for them.

I have published a press release which you can view here.

I hope to expand upon these five points in greater detail in due course. I will now consider next steps carefully with my legal team. In the meantime, thank you to everyone who has supported me. I am very sorry that we have been unable to prevail on this occasion.

All best wishes
Allison Bailey