[ad_1]
A barrister expelled from his chambers after describing a schoolgirl at the centre of a race discrimination case as a “stroppy teenager of colour” in a tweet had been previously sacked from a council’s legal team for anti-migrant rhetoric.
Cornerstone Barristers said Jon Holbrook’s statements on social media were “irreconcilable” with membership of the chambers.
Holbrook was referring to Ruby Williams, who was awarded £8,500 in an out-of-court settlement against Urswick Church of England school in Hackney, east London, after claims it racially discriminated against her.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) supported Williams, who was repeatedly sent home from school because of her afro hairstyle, to bring the case. Holbrook wrote that “the Equality Act undermines school discipline by empowering the stroppy teenager of colour”, in response to a video posted by the EHRC about the case.
The chambers were made aware of concerns relating to Holbrook’s tweets as early as October, the Guardian can confirm, after he was sacked by Brighton and Hove city council over comments made online.
Holbrook was representing the council in a case over whether a rough sleeper who had no recourse to public funds because of their immigration status should have been provided with emergency accommodation during the pandemic. Just weeks earlier, Holbrook had tweeted statements saying he would stop shopping at Sainsbury’s following the supermarket chain’s celebration of Black History Month and referencing a “migration invasion”.
After the Guardian inquired about the tweets in October, Brighton council withdrew instruction from Holbrook mid-case, saying he was hired at short notice and the council were “not aware of his social media posts”. A spokesperson for the council at the time said it had “raised our concerns about Mr Holbrook’s social media posts with the chambers he is a member of”.
When asked if Holbrook’s personal views on migration may have impacted the case, the council said: “The case was based on the council’s housing responsibility under national law and was not informed by Mr Holbrook’s personal views.”
Cornerstone Barristers said it repudiated the “particularly offensive tweet” regarding Williams and “all that it insinuates”, in a statement. Cornerstone Barristers, where Holbrook had been a member for 15 years, said Holbrook’s views “have never reflected the views of these chambers”. It added: “We unequivocally condemn discrimination in all its forms.”
Williams, now 19, told the Guardian she was not pleased about Holbrook’s expulsion, but was “grateful that it has been taken so seriously”. She said the case was “a big part of her life for so many years” and “can’t just be summed up as me being a ‘stroppy teenager of colour’”.
She said she had suffered with anxiety and panic attacks because of the fear of being sent home from school in contravention of the hair policy. She is a member of the Halo Collective and said their goal was to “create a future without hair discrimination”.
Her mother, Kate Williams, has made a complaint to the Bar Standards Board, the body which regulates barristers.
“I think his views are very dangerous and personally would not want a barrister who thinks that the Equality Act has a ‘harmful impact on free speech’ to be able to represent me legally,” Ruby Williams said.
Urswick school has never accepted liability in the race discrimination case. The hair policy on its website has since changed, no longer stating that “afro-style hair, including buns, should be of reasonable size and length” following a legally binding agreement with the EHRC.
Holbrook, in an article for the Critic website, claimed he resigned before the chambers’ decision to expel him, saying he no longer wanted to practise as a full-time barrister. He said he would “have more time to polemicise against the woke whose contempt for reasoned debate becomes clearer with each attempted cancellation”.
He added: “Thirty years ago, I began my legal career doing pro bono unfair dismissal cases for women sacked for being pregnant. I will now finish my legal career with pro bono unfair dismissal cases for women sacked for saying that a woman does not have a penis.”
[ad_2]
READ SOURCE
