.ltTime, ladies, please, as a last bastion of male chauvinism falls
The Times,
2 November 1982
One of the last bastions of male chauvinism, El Vino, the Fleet Street wine bar, fell yesterday, after the Court of Appeal ruled that it was breaking the law by refusing to allow women to stand and be served at the bar.
Last night, after a bumpy start, El Vino was resignedly settling down to women ordering drinks and mingling with the men. "Time Gentlemen-and Ladies", the barman called.
Earlier in the evening the favourite drinking place of lawyers and journalists ordered out some women who descended after the court of appeal held that its house rule against women standing at the bar and ordering drinks was in breach of the Sex Discrimination Act.
Lord Justice Eveleigh, Lord Justice Griffiths and Sir Roger Ormond upheld the appeal by Miss Anna Coote, a journalist, and Mrs Tess Gill, a solicitor (co-authors of Women's Rights: A Practical Guide- against a ruling in July that their objections were "extreme" and things at El Vino were best left as they were.
Judge Ranking had refused to grant the women a declaration against El Vino and said that there were only a few objections to the house rule, which was brought in 37 years ago when men returned from the war and found the bar full of women journalists.
But, instead of enjoying a celebration drink at the wine bar after the court ruling, Miss Coote and Mrs Gill were turned away, when they arrived ten minutes after opening time.
The two campaigners were told by Mr Paul Bracken, El Vino's manager: "I'm sorry, ladies, but I'm not going to serve you". Despite their protests-and those of their solicitor, Mr Michael Seifert-they were asked to leave.
Mr Bracken had earlier promised to serve all women who genuinely wanted a drink at the bar, "but not those who want to make trouble, or make a feminist point", he said.
Miss Coote and Mrs Gill continued their protests on the pavement outside El Vino.
There were three women journalists there at opening time-from the Press Association, The Daily Mail and The Times. The Press Association reporter was served with a glass of white but the staff thereafter followed a policy of ignoring all women waiting for drinks, serving the outnumbered men customers, and finally refusing, point blank, to serve them.
When challenged by The Times reporter, Mr Bracken said: "I don't have to give a reason". He then asked her to leave.
The doors were locked. The television cameras peered through the windows. Miss Coote and Mrs Gill arrived, went inside, were refused a drink and asked to leave.
An hour after opening, however, there were 10 women standing at the bar after being served.
Mr Christopher Mitchell, El Vino managing director, described the court judgement as an "awful shame", but said: "We have always conformed to the law, and we have every intention of doing so in the future."
The earlier rebuffs to women claiming their newly-won rights were because El Vino had been "stormed" by the media, he said.
"We locked the doors because of the television cameras and the crowds. We have to be careful because the place is rather too small, and we were afraid it might have caused a disturbance."
Later in the evening Philippa Toomey, The Times reporter, went down again to El Vino and ordered a drink. She was served.
Seasoned El Vino patrons last night varied in their reactions to events from a somewhat rhetorical outrage to scornful dismissal of the affair as a nine-day wonder. "Once the women have made their point, you won't see them for dust", one regular said.
Male revolt was largely confined, however, to bemused looks and muttered rumblings over the wine-cups. An elderly lawyer, who declined to identify himself, described his reaction as "shock".
The Court of Appeal judges ruled that, when a woman was refused a drink at the bar, she was "denied the opportunity to drink where others did, to mix with other people who were drinking in El Vino: was denied in fact, flexibility of choice of companion".
El Vino was ordered to pay costs of yesterday's case, estimated at ú8,000 to ú9,000. The judges took only five minutes to reach their decision.
