Genderblog newsletter: Morrison v BFF is (currently) go

It's going to be a long day...

This morning's ride

Good morning,

I'm starting this newsletter in my kitchen in Surrey. It's not quite 5am. I hope to do a bit more on the two trains I need to take to get to Gatwick and hopefully it finish off either in a departure lounge or somewhere in Belfast this morning.

I'm flying to Northern Ireland to cover an employment tribunal which has its origins in a four-minute speech made by Sara Morrison at a Let Women Speak event in Belfast on 16 April 2023.

After interviewing Sara for The Times and this blog, I have been drawn in by her case. I have made an application to live-tweet proceedings. Hopefully permission to do so will be a formality. I hope there is good mobile reception at court.

Background

Morrison v Belfast Film Festival is a first-tier employment tribunal brought about by a Sara because she feels her employer abandoned her when she spoke up about single sex rights. It is also a test case.

Both pieces I've written about Sara explain some of the background and the fact that in Northern Ireland, the Equality Act does not apply. Given that Forstater was about confirming gender-critical views are a protected belief and April's Supreme Court ruling was about clarifying the Equality Act, what protection do sex realists in Northern Ireland have?

This tribunal could be a mixture of fascinating detail, evolving law and a window into the state of the arts sector. It is also something of an experiment for me. I found covering the Rex v Linehan trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court a frustrating experience. There are no transcribers. No recording of proceedings is made. Getting written information out of the court appears next to impossible. Apparently I'm not even allowed to see witness statements. The system and law in Magistrates' courts appears stuck in the 17th century.

Caught reporting

I have not covered a tribunal in detail before. I have very little idea about the idiosyncrasies of Northern Irish law, let alone tribunal legislation as it relates to court reporting. I am flying somewhat blind. I do hope to get hold of the claim and response documents from both parties, which will lay out their respective cases. I very much hope I get to see the witness statements once the witnesses have been sworn in (as is usual at the High Court), and I hope live-tweeting is a go.

Either way I will report back via this newsletter each evening court sits this week. Feel free to cut n' paste n' repost anything you think is interesting from it, though please don't post its entirety online.

The tribunal is scheduled to last ten days. Proceedings start at 2pm. At the moment I have committed to being here for this week (five days). There is obviously a considerably higher outlay for me to cover a case outside London, but the Times commission made this first week potentially viable. I'll decide whether to try to cover week two on Friday.

I have no idea about the strength of either case, though of course both sides evidently think they have one. I went to see Hamlet at the National Theatre on Saturday with a friend who is now Director of a Very Large Company (we met twenty-five years ago at a rave in East Oxford Community Centre). He's been on the employers' side in many disputes and told me he only lets a case go to tribunal if he's almost certain the company will win. It's far easier to settle.

So far, he's let three disputes go to tribunal and won all three. Things seem slightly different with public sector (or grant-dependent) employers. Perhaps they simply cannot afford to make the sort of settlements you get in the corporate world, or they are happy to let things go to trial on the basis that it's ultimately taxpayers who will often be picking up the bill. Or they have a solid case.

Whatever happens, I would like to thank you profoundly for making a donation to join this newsletter mailing list. Whether you joined back when I set this up last year, in September for the Glinner trial or because of this case, I am deeply grateful. It allows me to keep most of what I do free at the point of consumption, and of course, report from the ground where possible. Do feel free to forward this newsletter privately to those who you think might be interested in my coverage of Morrison v BFF and the wider gender story.

Finally, please do send me as much feedback as you want - whether it's about the content, tone, design of the site, inside information or other gender stories I might want to look at. Every email goes straight to my inbox. It is secure, and will not be seen by anyone else.

Very best and thanks again

Nick