I couldn't really say. They kept referring to documents I didn't have sight of, and it seemed all very technical, which is appropriate given that it's about the DPP's guidance and was being presented by KCs to two senior Judges, one of whom I think is President of the Kings Bench Division Dame Victoria Sharp.
Nick Wallis gives a typically excellent summary which I am pleased to read.
Dame Victoria mentioned several times how hot it was, in an apologetic way, I think - see below. She and the other judge were wearing high necked long sleeved blouses and white bands, no robes. I think that's what the female counsel for Sex Matters was also wearing, but she was furthest away from the camera. I think the male counsel was in suit and tie but I'm not sure.
Counsel for the CPS wore a jacket and black robe on top. She must have been even warmer: she did make a (perfectly sensible) comment about this in context of the J saying something sympathetic when Counsel lost her place or forgot a reference or something. Her colleague sitting behind her wore a high necked sleeveless black dress, I think, with a black jacket on top which she removed during one of the short breaks and (I think) replaced before the JJs returned.
Apologies to those who think this is trivial: I am interested in formal dress. It seemed to be understood that the heat meant that people couldn't perform at their best, not in a "this will be grounds for an appeal" way, but in a "small lapses of concentration are excusable" one, I think.
Also, having watched the employment tribunals from smaller centres which must be far less used to arranging remote access, the contrast in what observers could see was most marked. There was a split screen: one side showed the two justices front on, and the other the rest of the courtroom looking from one side at the front. Everything was in focus and the sound was clear.