all 10 comments

[–]ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah 10 insightful - 6 fun10 insightful - 5 fun11 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Dragging out the world’s smallest violin for Mermaids and the TRA army.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi.[S] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)


General Regulatory Chamber of the First-Tier Tribunal rules that Mermaids had no legal right to challenge LGB Alliance’s charitable status

Mermaids and the Good Law Project, forced the UK’s only charity that stands exclusively for the rights of LGB people to defend its charitable status in a six-day tribunal hearing. Today’s judgment confirmed, as LGB Alliance had argued from the start, that Mermaids had no legal basis on which to bring this challenge.

Responding to this judgment, Kate Barker, Chief Executive Officer of LGB Alliance, said:

“We are absolutely delighted with this judgment and with the news that we will retain our charitable status.

Two years ago, we were clear that Mermaids had no standing to challenge our registration and today the tribunal has confirmed that we were correct.

Whilst this is a battle we did not seek, neither would we flee from it. But the cost to us and to our supporters has been huge.

Our legal fees amount to more than £250K and that money has come from small supporter donations. So, whilst our win is great news for lesbians, gay men and bisexuals, we can’t help but reflect on the fact that a sum like that would have been better spent on projects such as our Helpline for young people, our LGB Archive and our Friends’ Network.

This case did, however, provide a welcome opportunity to talk about our work in a public forum and we hope that the era of ‘no debate’ is over.”

The Tribunal said, “the fundamental rationale of the democratic process upon which our society is founded is that when competing views, opinions and policies are publicly debated and exposed to public scrutiny, the good will over time drive out the bad and the true will prevail over the false. Only when differing views are expressed, contradicted, answered and debated will the legislature be able to obtain the fullest picture of the views held by those they represent.”

Kate Barker added,

“In a free society we must be free to disagree and we hold fiercely to that view.

We are relieved that this long, and sometimes bruising, process has reached an end and we thank all of our wonderful supporters and our brilliant legal team.

As to our detractors…They tried to run us ragged. They failed. We’re happy that now the work goes on.”

Our legal team

LGB Alliance’s solicitor is Peter Daly, a partner at Doyle Clayton. He said:

“We are pleased that the Tribunal has agreed with our primary case that Mermaids never had standing to bring this Appeal in the first place. Our clients have been put through two years of stressful and unnecessary litigation. We look forward to them now being able to put this behind them and turn their full attentions towards their important charitable work in support of lesbian, gay and bisexual people.”

[–]MyLongestJourney 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Another win for the LGB movement in GB.Kudos to the brave women who,when Stonewall betrayed LGBs, founded the LGB alliance to fight for LGB rights instead of peacefully retiring and enjoying their older age. And huge thanks to their supporters.

[–]JoshuaNumbersHomo Sap 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I am unsure of how the UK legal system works in this regard, can they be countersued for damages to recoup costs?

Either way, serves them right for bringing an eraser to a same-sex-attracted permanent marker fight.

I found an article about this on unherd (since I had to catch up a bit, being a yank) : unherd article

The fact that one of Mermaids’s key criticisms of LGB Alliance is that they even use the phrase “same-sex attraction”, which Mermaids claim is “weaponised” against trans people, tells us all we need to know. We are no longer allowed to use the language we have developed to describe ourselves because eliminating perceived slights towards trans people must always come first."

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi.[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am not sure yet re: countersuit but I sure hope so. That was a fine example of vexatious litigation.

[–]JulienMayfair 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The Good Law Project appears to be an organization completely captured by trans activists. For instance, they brag:

We funded the successful intervention against the Keira Bell decision and we funded the successful AB case which established that parents could consent to puberty blockers for their children.

And it looks like they may appeal this decision in the LGB Alliance case.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi.[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It wouldn't do to admit they are wrong, so I wouldn't be surprised if they try to appeal it.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi.[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Tribunal Tweets update, with press releases from LGB Alliance, the Charity Commission, and Mermaids:

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi.[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

[–]GrouchyHierophantLuGuBrious not Tenebrous 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We're still mostly defending. I can't wait for when we can sue those child abusers en masse. I have a dream...