Update #17 – Statement from Doyle Clayton solicitors about the significance of the grant of permission by the Court of Appeal
Here’s a statement from Doyle Clayton solicitors about the significance of the grant of permission by the Court of Appeal in my claim against Stonewall.
(It also contains a good summary of my win against Garden Court Chambers.)
The Court of Appeal is the highest court within the Senior Courts of England and Wales and deals only with appeals from other courts and tribunals. Only the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom sits above it and is the final court of appeal in the UK.
It is not disputed that in 2019, Stonewall wrote to Garden Court Chambers: “for Garden Court Chambers to continue associating with [Ms Bailey] puts us in a difficult position with yourselves” and that Stonewall trusted Garden Court “would do what is right and stand in solidarity with trans people.”
I am a lesbian, and I believe that this was an outrageous and unlawful act by Stonewall, a charity established to advocate on behalf of and protect the rights of lesbian, gay and bisexual people from discrimination.
My legal claim against Stonewall centres on section 111 of the Equality Act 2010. This section of the act makes it unlawful for organisations with the required service provision relationship with an employer from instructing, causing or inducing acts of discrimination by that employer against an employee.
If my appeal is upheld, Stonewall’s actions will have been unlawful. The result will be to protect employees from similar behaviour in the future, which, in the current climate I believe is essential.
I am fortunate to have the same legal team to take this case to the Court of Appeal: solicitor Peter Daly of Doyle Clayton, and Ben Cooper KC.
Peter Daly said of the grant of permission:
“We are pleased that permission has been granted in terms which satisfy both of the alternative tests for permission.
“There is currently a lack of caselaw about section 111 Equality Act 2010, a provision which has potentially significant implications, and we look forward to driving the law forward in this area.
“Our case has always been that the email sent by Stonewall satisfied the requirements of section 111 and was therefore unlawful. We look forward to making that case before the Court of Appeal and are optimistic as to the result.”
All best wishes
Allison