Pages

▼

Wednesday, 7 January 2009

Lillian's ping-pong pantomime of prejudice

Queer-hating former registrar Lillian Ladele (pictured) – a self-confessed Christian – seems about to make the next move in the ping-pong pantomime over her homophobic refusal to do the job she was being paid for.
She refused to tie the knot for same-sex couples in her role as a registrar in Islington, London. She lost her job, she appealed, she won, her employers appealed, they won, and now she seems set to appeal against that. Lots of money for the lawyers.

You can see our last post on this here.

Personnel Today tells us that Ladele’s lawyers have now asked for permission to appeal.

The story says:

Ladele’s lawyer, Mark Jones head of employment law at Ormerods, told Personnel Today that he hopes to hear in the next two weeks or so if permission to appeal has been granted. He said he could not give too much information about the appeal but that one of the grounds would relate to evidence put before the tribunal and the EAT by the council’s own witnesses “relating to the treatment of Ms Ladele and the reasons for it”.
Posted

1 comment:

  1. Baal's BumSun Jan 11, 05:05:00 pm GMT

    I still cannot understand how this woman can cry prejudice to support her prejudice.
    Then again I have to wonder, are there mental health issues here. I mean if this woman's delusions are preventing her functioning in a rational way, should she not be removed from society to prevent her harming herself or others. If she thinks god and or jesus is talking to her then perhaps the court should lock her up for her own safety.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome lively and challenging comments. However, please try to stay on topic, be polite and do not use abusive, racist or sexist language, and do not incite your readers to violence or other antisocial behaviour, or your comment will be deleted. This isn't censorship: it's a case of staying within the bounds of decency and having an eye to the law, although we realise the law will be different in different countries.

We do not bar anonymous comments at the moment, but we would prefer that those commenting play fair and use their name or at least a regular nom de plume. It does show a confidence in your convictions. We know, too, that it's easy to use a false name and be effectively anonymous, but, again, we appeal to your sense of good practice. Even a wacky nom de plume is better, since at least readers will come to know that contributor and maybe remember her or his previous comments.

Blatant commercial advertising will be removed.

Comments should not be construed as necessarily the policy or opinion of the Pink Triangle Trust.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.