It's amazing how much more quickly the Prime Minister can read and digest and make his mind up on a 161 page Court of Appeal judgment than he managed with the Privileges Committee Report on Johnson or the Tolley report on Raab.
@caoilfhionnanna
@BBCNews
All the worse, he repeatedly used the interview to undercut & defame Virginia Guiffre, who accused him (and Prince Andrew) of taking part, and suggested she should be charged, and wasn't challenged on it. That's really, disgracefully poor.
In the PM's opening of the Vote of No Confidence in the Government he said "We saw off Brenda Hale".
You what? What is he on about?
This is embarrassing.
He's debating as if he in the Oxford Union, not in the House of Commons.
The PM has accepted the Met’s decision & apologised. I fully support the PM & Chancellor as they focus on maintaining the UK’s international leadership against Russian brutality in Ukraine, and delivering our recovery from the pandemic for the British people at home.
What astonished me most in this interview was to learn that where someone wrongfully convicted receives compensation, they then have to pay a proportion of it to the Prison Service for board and lodgings for their time inside. Presuming that is accurate, it’s dumbfounding.
"The very idea of pretending I've done something as horrific as that, I couldn't even contemplate it."
Andrew Malkinson, who served 17 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit, says falsely admitting guilt to get out of prison would've been 'a hollow choice'.
#R4Today
I've found one (and only one) reference in a judgment to unintentional bullying - an employment tribunal judgment in Pritchard v CQC.
Unfortunately for Priti Patel, it's not there as a defence. Quite the opposite.
1/THREAD: Forstater v CGD Europe: As everyone knows by now, the big picture is that F won & the belief in immutability of sex is protected under s.10 EqA. That is no surprise - many of us predicted this long ago. The judgment sets out why in very clear terms.
#ukemplaw
Richard Hermer KC as AG shows how seriously the new PM prioritises the importance of the rule of law. A seriously heavyweight appointment of someone in whom lawyers around the country will have huge confidence.
My 6 year old: Daddy, do you always win trials?
Me: No, not always.
6: When you lose, do you say sorry to the other people?
Me: No, why?
6: You've told them they're lying but they were telling the truth. You should say sorry.
Me: *Silent; chastened*
It's that time of the week again where the Bar Council need to put out their statement on the inappropriateness of the PM saying Starmer doesn't share "the values of the British people" because of his clients as a lawyer. It's time for the Lord Chancellor to rebuke Sunak too.
I'm going to steal Jason Beer's devastating question to Paula Vennells:
"You'd have us believe that that note was a misunderstanding between you and the keyboard you were typing on?"
There's barely a trial when I couldn't find a use for it.
Parents doing homeschooling across the land may be breathing a sigh of relief on 8 March when the kids return to school.
Imagine though their horror when they realise the return to school is a service provision change & all parents will TUPE transfer as teachers.
#ukemplaw
Where the Solicitor General leads, surely the Attorney General and Lord Chancellor must follow (he says with a tinge of hope and desperation in his voice).
Started reading
@BarristerSecret
’s latest book list night. Woke this morning from a dream where I’d encountered her on a barrister-only train to Amsterdam. I can report that she wears a Cossack hat & took a nap in a child’s buggy. That should narrow her true identity down a bit.
Yvette Cooper is such a talented orator. An excellent example of how measured rhetoric and a calm and dismissive tone can be far more powerful than shouting.
Multiple major disputes between Home Secretary & PM in 5 wks.
Net migration targets, ECHR, re-classifying drugs, small boats, agricultural workers... & torpedoing PM’s India trade deal.
Never seen chaos like it. Wd be front page if Chancellor wasn’t worse.
Commons debate today
It'll come as a shock to many to learn that human rights are apparently immutable.
How does that accord with the ECHR as a living instrument or with the fact that most of the rights within it are qualified rights?
What’s the “sanction” going to be for those not taking part? How are they going to square the weekend volunteering with 18 year olds who have weekend jobs or caring responsibilities or whose religious practice precludes them from any work for part of the weekend? Hmmm 🤔
Breaking: Supreme Court dismisses appeal in Mencap. The time a worker is required to sleep on site or nearby doesn't count towards minimum wage calculations. A sigh of relief for care organisations but a sad day for some of the poorest paid workers in society.
#ukemplaw
#TheRealMoFarah
superbly demonstrates the plight of so many refugees. Their stories are complex, their suffering hard to imagine, their fear of being found not to be entitled to belong is palpable. Hopefully this makes some supporters of current refugee policy reconsider.
As many of us mere mortals contemplate getting some sleep, a group of mainly septuagenarians and octogenarians are settling in for a long night of trying to bring back some humanity to the abhorrent Illegal Migration Bill.
#thingsBarristersNeverSay
There's no need to send me instructions. Just email me a load of attachments in a variety of formats and I'll work out which side I represent and what needs to be done myself.
@daniel_barnett
Don’t most people think in both? Pint of milk, MPH for speed, stones and pounds for weight, feet and inches for height, furlongs for horse racing. Though I guess it’s only those of a certain age who can convert between the two.
🧵In today's Times, Libby Purves pens an article that will be like a red rag to a bull to many employment lawyers.
First, an incendiary headline and subheading (which I accept may have been written by the editorial team rather than her).
#ukemplaw
1/ On Tuesday, the EAT hears the appeal in Forstater where EJ Tayler found F's comments about the immutability of biological sex not worthy of respect in a democratic society & hence not capable of protection as a philosophical belief. That decision is appealed.
#ukemplaw
#uber
THREAD 1/ So, as we now know, the Supreme Court has ruled that
#Uber
drivers are workers & are entitled to pay whenever logged on & prepared to take a passenger. Here's the link to the judgment:
#ukemplaw
[THREAD] 1/ Seeing as a
@brianmoore666
retweet has brought me a host of rugby fan followers, I thought as a treat I'd introduce you to the greatest ever rugby-based
#ukemplaw
case - Mason v Huddersfield Giants. Here's the link: )
#Rugby
#rugbyleague
2/ F's belief, as characterised by the EAT, is that biological sex is real, important, immutable & not to be conflated with identity, as a consequence of which she considers it a statement of fact that women are adult human females & trans women are male.
The EHRC's skeleton in Forstater:
In summary, the threshold for exclusion as not worthy of respect in a democratic society is very high, the threshold for amounting to a belief is low & the focus is on the belief & not its manifestation.
#ukemplaw
Legal commentators are free to disagree with the decision in Forstater but not to try to minimise it as a relatively low-level English court. “Relatively” it’s the highest court to rule on the issue & is precedent throughout the EAT’s jurisdiction, including Scotland.
6/10 He offers no Scottish authorities that GC views are protected in Scotland. Forstater is a highly controversial case from a relatively low-level English Court - the Scottish courts may well decide the issues differently.
This is outrageous. In my 10 years of immigration/asylum appeals, I won plenty & lost plenty. It was often difficult to predict correctly, but invariably appeals followed wholly unsatisfactory Home Office interviews & decisions. An appeal was always justifiable, win or lose.
Jess Phillips is such an incredibly strong individual. Laying bare now how abhorrently the campaign was run against her by supporters of the runner up.
Everything about this regime is horrific. Yet also horrific is that if one of these women risked their life to escape across the Afghan border and to make their way to the safety of the UK, we’d treat her as a criminal & hope to send her to Rwanda.
This isn’t right. There is a vast difference between being young and elected for however long until the next election as compared to being young and ennobled for life. One reasonably expects considerable achievements before someone is given a life peerage, whatever their party.
Their crime is not to be young. Their crime is to be Conservatives. This criticism comes from the same people who rejoiced in Mhairi Black's election and the election of a 25 year old on Thursday in Selby. The hypocrisy is breathtaking.
1/ Those in
#ukemplaw
advising employers/employees on what to do about employees whose route to work is via public transport and who are scared of using it at the moment will want to read Edwards v SoS for Justice: )
The headline on
@thetimes
letter page is strictly accurate. 99% thinking one way and 1% the other would constitute a divide. Not an equal divide, but a divide nonetheless.
The headline is accurate yet misleading.
Gave a talk to my son's class of 4-5 year olds today about what it's like to be a barrister.
The teacher told me that my son had been telling the class all day that I'm a Rabbi!
Pressing questions from the kids included:
How old are you?
What did you have for breakfast?
"Please come over here on a zero hours contract at horrifically low pay for very important yet unpleasant and very tough work. Oh, and come on your own - leave your spouse and children for a few years as we don't want them here in order to make our figures look better."
Today in Parliament we have laid an order to ban overseas care workers from bringing dependants.
This is just one part of our plan to deliver the biggest-ever cut in migration 👇
My 6 year old &
@AmyBraier
’s gingerbread representation of how I’d look after receiving a really shocking judgment (which must be from the Court of Appeal, given that I’m robed)
BREAKING:
#Uber
DRIVERS win. Supreme Court finds they are workers. Uber gulps. Holiday pay and NMW experts sharpen their claws.
#ukemplaw
-yers keep fingers crossed the written judgment provides clear and simple tests.
23/ The judgment is impressive & accessible & it is undoubtedly right. This preliminary issue ought not to be the battle royale of this litigation. That will come with questions of liability & of justification. I suspect this case will be back before the EAT before it's over.
To clarify, the Bill provides for paid bereavement leave for parents suffering pregnancy loss in these ways. Those replying to deride me not using the word "women", please stop. I suffered 3 miscarriages along with my wife. This isn't the tweet on which to have a linguistic fight
Tomorrow sees the 2nd reading of the Miscarriage Leave Bill, seeking to provide entitlement to 3 days' paid bereavement leave to those suffering miscarriage, molar pregnancy or ectopic pregnancy.
#ukemplaw
#miscarriage
Employment lawyers are pretty familiar with the person guilty of misconduct who resigns when he sees the writing is on the wall and is written in permanent marker.
Well done Cornerstone. There is room at the bar for disagreement. There is room for those of controversial opinion. There should be no room for racism.
Why do interviewers keep referring to the Illegal Migration Bill in terms of efforts to stop small boat crossings?
It's much wider, requiring detention of anyone who claims asylum here unless they come directly from the country of persecution without passing through anywhere else
5/ In appealing the ET's decision that F's belief didn't meet Grainger V, F, the EHRC & IoC noted F's binary position on sex was consistent with the common law & asserted the ET delved into manifestation/balancing of rights, which was too far at the prelim stage.
2/ Here is the link for F's appeal skeleton:
It's more a thesis than a traditional skeleton, but it certainly drives home the points from every conceivable angle.
It may also be the only ever EAT skeleton to have 4 references to Orwell!
#ukemplaw
BREAKING: Supreme Court upholds 35,000 ASDA retail workers' right to compare themselves to ASDA distribution centre workers in bringing an equal pay claim. The North hypothetical survives. Onto the next battles to be fought in this already long-running case!
#ukemplaw
Todd Blanche says Trump was very involved with the decisions about his defense, " He wanted to be the litigator. You want to be the one that was actually arguing because he's a smart guy and he knows what he's doing. We made every decision together."
I never realised that when I practised immigration law I was doing so as an activist rather than a lawyer giving the right to representation to those who explained how they had been persecuted & risked their lives to get here. The HO post is horrendously dehumanising.
I shouldn’t be ignorant of this, but this fact in The Times article on civil legal aid is extraordinary. No rise in rates since 1996 - how can any law firm afford to provide this service for fees set 28 years ago?
Probably procedurally unfair if this was in the UK, but I get the feeling that taking part in an attempted coup might lead to a decent Polkey reduction and contributory conduct reduction.
#ukemplaw
In 2021, I've put out a hefty 176 threads on
#ukemplaw
cases.
Forgive me for indulging on New Year's Eve in my thoughts on a top 10 (in no particular order) in a little 🧵:
Why do these journalists not follow all the barristers of Twitter? We've been trying as a profession to prepare you for today, yet you've taken no lessons!
#DominicCummngs
Any former trial lawyer can tell you that witness prep is essential. And with a plaintiff, defendant, or C-suite exec of either, that prep begins well in advance of trial & often involves faux cross. And that brings me to everyone’s fave defamation defendant, Donald Trump. 1/
3/ F held a consultancy contract with CGD think tank as a sustainable development expert. Some colleagues found her expression of her views offensive, & her contract wasn't renewed. She brought an ET claim, which included a claim for direct discrimination on grounds of belief.
7/ The EAT considered the ET had not found F would misgender in all cases but would sometimes refuse to use preferred pronouns when considering it relevant (such as in discussing the presence of trans women in women-only spaces).
1/ A really odd hatchet job on employment tribunals in today's Times. Its purpose is unclear though I worry it might be part of the "we should reintroduce employment tribunal fees" PR campaign.
#ukemplaw
For milliennia many of us Jews haven't worked on a Friday evening, and according to some people we run the world. If it's good enough for the rulers of the world, it's good enough for the head honcho of a little island.
Sorry does Keir Starmer actually understand the job he's trying to get elected into? This is an absolutely ludicrous thing to say.
Prime Minister of the world's 5th largest economy is not a job you can clock out of at 6pm.
15/ The EAT is particularly critical of the ET's characterisation of F's views as absolutist. In its dogmatic sense that was irrelevant. In its other sense of suggesting F would always misgender, it was factually wrong. It was a misnomer.
21/ The only possible conclusion on a proper analysis of Grainger V was that F's belief was protected. It fell nowhere near the threshold for Art 17 ECHR exclusion. Moreover, it was widely shared & consistent with the current state of the law.
@BarristerSecret
It’s notable that whilst the Justice Secretary listed those the increased sentencing power for Magistrates would benefit, he didn’t include the accused on that list. That a person charged might be innocent & deserves the best of justice doesn’t appear to be in his mind.
1/ Well, we didn't have to wait long to see why this morning's put-up hatchet job in the Times was commissioned - the floating of ill-conceived policies reliant on this morning's ill-conceived straw men.
#ukemplaw
8/ In determining whether a belief met the s.10 EqA threshold, the EAT was keen to stress that in a liberal democracy diversity & pluralism of thought/belief is foundational, the courts should steer clear of pronouncements on validity, & the Art 9 threshold is a modest one.
The truly terrifying thing with
#MakeMePrimeMinister
is that it's tough to imagine the current Cabinet (with a couple of exceptions) having the competence to make the right decision in the scenarios with which the contestants are confronted.
This is why
#ukemplaw
Twitter is 1 of the best parts of the internet for employment lawyers. 1 of our very best lawyers providing an immensely clear explanation on the controversial topic of how the law applies to single sex spaces. Part 1 of a real public service Twitter thread.
1/ # EHRC SSS Guidance. Given the discussion that has followed the publication of the EHRC’s guidance on single sex spaces & services (SSS), I thought it would be helpful to set out what the Equality Act (EA) says.
As a barrister trying to balance practice and family life, the negative of losing a few days’ refreshers when the claimant abandoned his claim in the middle of my cross-examination is more than balanced out by being able to see my daughter in a concert at Wembley Arena tomorrow.
When I read law, the judgments of Butler-Sloss were always at the vanguard of precedent. She is one of the country's foremost legal minds. Please listen to what she has to say about the Illegal Migration Bill being "quite simply, cruel". ~AA
This is what happens when an interviewer is well briefed, well prepared, listens to the interviewee's responses, and is ready to challenge as appropriate. Kudos to
@krishgm
for an excellent interview on the Illegal Migration Bill
Len McCluskey of the Unite union says "my executive will want questions answered" over the use of members' money to settle the action, a "clear miscalculation," as "Keir was advised....we would not lose in court" by "the Labour party barristers"
#R4Today
Mark your diaries for next Friday morning. Cancel all meetings. Uber is on its way!!!
(h/t to the ubiquitous
@AdamWagner1
who spotted it first!)
#ukemplaw
If I didn't know him, I'd seriously wonder at this stage whether
@AdamWagner1
was merely the collective identity of a crack team of lawyers. I've no idea how he's keeping on top of all these new Regs whilst maintaining his practice. It's pretty much a 20-hour a day task right now
4/ It'll be fascinating to see how the appeal is decided and whether the President will take the easy route of a narrowly laid out decision in F's favour or whether he will take the invitation to pronounce far more widely on free speech protection.
#ukemplaw
Immensely proud of my brilliant wife,
@AmyBraier
, confirmed this weekend as the new chair of trustees at the
@MiscarriageA
, showing such determination to use her skills and expertise to respond to our own 3 miscarriages by helping others who also suffer such tragedies.
As one of those British Jews, I'm trying to understand why I should be concerned if national leaders who take antisemitism seriously also takes Islamophobia seriously.
As a British Jew, I'd be disappointed if they didn't.
Imagine you're a British Jew. You've just witnessed the worst atrocities against Jews since World War Two. And then a wave of anti-Semitic & pro-Hamas chants on Britain's streets. And now your national leaders fall over themselves to warn the country about "Islamophobia".
12/ The EAT waved away arguments that the effect of such a high threshold for exclusion would mean Grainger V would only keep out beliefs akin to Nazism & totalitarianism. The EAT considered that was how it should be - only the gravest violations of ECHR rights failing to qualify
4/ The ET found F's belief absolutist, propagated irrespective of violations to the dignity of those affected, & not worthy of respect in a democratic society. Thus the ET found F's belief failed the 5th Grainger criterion ('Grainger V') & was thus not protected under EqA s.10.
14/ Assessing the ET decision, the EAT found the ET strayed into evaluation of F's belief, which was not a neutral stance & wasn't appropriate, nor was it appropriate to delve into F's dogmatism about her belief.
12/ Mr Mason won. He was awarded £167,311 (subject to tax) plus £35,000 costs. And he has the distinction of being involved in the only reported UK case to refer to "anus" and "hairy peach" in the judgment! [THREAD ENDS]
#ukemplaw
#Rugby
#rugbyleague
3/ I've not seen the other side's skeleton, but this has always seemed a pretty simple issue to me. Whilst I'm a big fan of HHJ Tayler's judgments, I think EJ Tayler's judgement went awry on this one, & that the real battle in this case should be on causation, not protection.
10/ The origins of Grainger V were held to make clear that for a belief not to satisfy that criterion, there needs to be clear establishment of an extremely grave threat to Convention principles. Art 17 ECHR is the benchmark for that assessment. Para 62 is the judgment's key para
17/ Crucial to their analysis, the EAT noted the GRA permitted of exceptions to reference being limited to the acquired gender & that it's not an erasure in non-legal contexts of the prior gender. It is not a rewriting of history requiring earlier records to be expunged.
9/ On threshold, Art 17 ECHR is key. It prohibits reliance on ECHR rights to destroy the rights of others, such as by relying on freedom of expression to espouse hatred, violence of totalitarianism inimical to democratic principles. Art 17 is a very high threshold.