Allison Bailey loses her case against Stonewall – again

The Court of Appeal has dismissed “gender critical” barrister Allison Bailey’s appeal against Stonewall.

The decision follows years of litigation by Bailey against both Stonewall and Garden Court Chambers, in which Bailey accused Stonewall of causing discrimination against her. Bailey is a prominent “gender critical” activist, who helped to set up the anti-trans campaign group LGB Alliance in 2019.

Although Bailey won her initial claim of discrimination against Garden Court Chambers, Stonewall has always been her primary target. Bailey’s crowdfunder for her case, launched in 2020, was titled “I am suing Stonewall”. At the time of writing, this message is still plastered across the front page of Bailey’s personal website.

The Court of Appeal decided that both the original employment tribunal, and subsequently the employment appeal tribunal, were entitled to dismiss her claim against Stonewall. The employment tribunal had found that a complaint made by Stonewall about Bailey to her chambers was “no more than a protest”, and it did not play any part in the outcome of Garden Court’s investigation. The Court of Appeal said that the tribunal had found that Stonewall’s actions were merely the “occasion” for the discrimination, rather than being the “effective cause of it”. The decision had been taken independently by Garden Court.

The employment tribunal said there was “no evidence” that Stonewall had directed the complaints process, as Allison alleged, saying this was “a conspiracy theory”.

Although Bailey argued that the findings of the employment tribunal had been perverse, the Court of Appeal held that such a challenge was “unrealistic”.

The Court of Appeal also confirmed that the employment appeal tribunal was entitled to observe that not only “gender critical” beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010. Stonewall’s beliefs are also protected, as is the expression of those beliefs. Although these were “strong views” which are “diametrically opposed”, the Court of Appeal said, “both sets of beliefs warrant protection under the 2010 Act”. This provides Court of Appeal authority for the protection of pro-trans beliefs under the Equality Act.

Good Law Project’s trans rights lead, Jess O’Thomson, branded this “yet another failure of anti-trans lawfare”. 

“Anti-trans campaigners have been telling everyone that they are right about the law,” O’Thomson said, “and have used that to pressure organisations into doing what they want. But they keep losing.

“Recent decisions have shown that people and organisations can be inclusive and the Court of Appeal has said that pro-trans beliefs are protected. This pattern should give organisations the confidence to stand up to anti-trans bullies.”