From CEDAWinLAW Facebook page 30/05/2025:
FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR WASPI LIMITED THAT SEEKS TO E X C L U D E VOICES OF ALL GROUPS WHEN BY STARK CONTRAST #CEDAWinLAW I N C L U D E S THE VOICES OF ALL GROUPS IN #MEDIATION AND A BETTER OUTCOME FOR ALL CONCERNED
Waspi Limited has rebranded itself on a new website.
●Why would Waspi Limited seek to:
i rebrand itself
ii who it represents
iii and the journey of the repeatedly rejected "flawed" PHSO report by govt and govt lawyers,
whilst awaiting permission for a judicial review in an application made six months ago?
Waspi Limited earlier accurately stated on its crowdjustice site that it does not represent all 1950s Women and, furthermore, why it does not represent all 1950s Women.
Waspi Limited failed in its attempt to redefine on its new website who it represents ie it represents a small percentage of victims, namely, its paid-up membership and The Six with whom some vital information - kept from the vast majority of victims, for many years - was exclusively shared.
Waspi Limited is in jeopardy of thus standing accused of astroturfing, namely, falsely representing public support.
●Why would Waspi Limited attempt to redefine who it represents and the character of the earlier application for a judicial review on the PHSO report amid an application for another judicial review challenging the govt's position
Waspi Limited claims it won an earlier judicial review. According to Waspi Limited's crowdjustice update terms were settled by litigants' solicitors who submitted to a court a draft Court Order for approval.
A judge then ordered:
1. The Stage 2 Report is quashed.
2. The Defendant (Ombudsman) shall reconsider those aspects of the Stage 2 Report referred to in the Statement of Reasons.
●Why would Waspi Limited misleadingly claim it won an earlier judicial review - when no full hearing of the legal arguments and evidence took place at the higher courts - during an application for another judicial review?
●Why had Waspi Limited itself not thoroughly challenged the PHSO report at its publication stages when it had had several opportunities to do so?
Waspi Limited's "extraordinary about turn" by David Hencke
"Now buried in this is a U-turn by Waspi Limited. The letter states it would like to explore an alternative disputes resolution (Mediation) to solve the problem.
This is extraordinary about turn because only last year (2024) #CEDAWinLAW put forward the same idea and invited Waspi to be an interested party (in its judicial review based on #Mediation)
John Halford sent for all the papers and flatly rejected the approach.
Not only that but presumably on the orders of Angela Madden, who runs the Waspi Limited company, decided to side with the DWP against #CEDAWinLAW if it came to court.
Again the DWP could use it against them if they get a good lawyer."
by David Hencke
Veteran Lobby Correspondent
& Award Winning Investigative Journalist
●Why would Waspi Limited have made such an illogical U-turn when it had itself sought ADR (Mediation) which was refused by the govt ?
Waspi Limited and its fellow Waspi 2018 group promulgated a May 2025 notice via Ms Hilary Simpson to satellite groups wherein was stated that the APPG's fixation on "working with all groups" was a "distraction".
Link here
●Why would Waspi Limited with Waspi 2018 do so amid an application for another judicial review?
Seemingly, Waspi Limited along with its fellows have done so in order to design out ALL other groups than itself (eg the legal rights of 3.5m #50sWomen that #CEDAWinLAW uniquely represents along with its call to #Mediation) in representation of its unconsented call for compensation of £1,000-£3,000 for those cherry-picked and prepared to queue at the DWP to prove entitlement.
NOT ON #CEDAWinLAW's WATCH where UK & International Laws are onside all 3.5m #50sWomen
NOT ON #CEDAWinLAW's WATCH when the current Secretary of State for Work & Pensions is in jeopardy of a clear case of an unlawful refusal to join a reasonable invitation to Mediation unless the Minister accepts #CEDAWinLAW's invitation.
NOT ON #CEDAWinLAW WATCH when it has invited all group leaders to join Early Neutral Evaluation towards #Mediation and the best outcome for all concerned.
#CEDAWinLAW WILL NEVER SUCCUMB TO ANY PROVOCATION OR CENSORSHIP FROM ANY SOURCE TO BE SILENCED
All #50sWomen are invited to request postings of their views in these matters.
Link to the post on CEDAWinLAW Facebook page
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Notes:
■Under the ratified CEDAW Treaty, General Recommendation 40, Women are legally entitled to lead at decision tables.
■Under new historic Civil Procedure Rules on Alternative Dispute Resolution (#Mediation) courts actively encourage potential litigants towards #Mediation ahead of expensive legal challenges such as judicial reviews.
The overwhelmed courts now use these powers to order litigants to enter into swift #Mediation ahead of costly legal challenges prone these days to languishing in long queues.
#Mediation's legal foothold towards an early resolution to an otherwise costly dispute is set in court procedures:-
● CPR/ADR new historic rules enable a court to order or encourage parties to engage in Alternative Dispute Resolution [ADR] (#Mediation)
●The courts has the power to use #Mediation against one or both parties wishes thus are likely to use it on their own motion, if not on application
●The courts are unlikely to be persuaded by arguments that #Mediation has no realistic prospect of success
● Parties will be well advised to have #Mediation in mind during the progress of the case and to work out when, or if, to propose or be ready to meet proposals for it from the other party or the court
● At all stages, parties must consider settling litigation by any means of Alternative Dispute Resolution (#Mediation)
●The pressure of pending cases will be a factor in favour of #Mediation
● A claim may be stayed for any number of days to allow parties to engage in #Mediation
● In deciding costs issues, the court may also take into account failure to comply with such an order or unreasonably failing to engage in ADR (#Mediation).
■A Top 500 team of Mediators is on standby to be considered for the neutral #Mediation role.
■#CEDAWinLAW dismisses Sir John Hayes' Hardship Fund and the begging bowls that accompany it.