Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Tribunal Tweets Profile picture
@tribunaltweets
Jan 28 • 1 tweets • 1 min read • Read on X
We expect to be reporting today from the Edinburgh Employment Tribunal on the case of Toshack vs Geoamey Ltd. Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Tribunal Tweets

Tribunal Tweets Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @tribunaltweets

Tribunal Tweets Profile picture
Jun 16
We expect the afternoon session of the JR brought by Sex Matters against the National Police Chief's Council and the British Transport Police to resume at 2 pm.
Abbreviations are in the thread below.
We resume.
FB - hope to give you some assistance in interpretation on how consent works in sec 5 of PACE. But starting with Criminal Justice Act of Scotland, it is a good example of how to make an consent based search model unlawful. Absolutely clear what is unlawful.
A constable can only search on police powers. We would expect this if common law on consent was no longer operable under PACE.
Now onto consent & PACE, 3 examples to share. Consent must be requested first and if not given then coercive powers must be used.
Read 31 tweets
Tribunal Tweets Profile picture
May 19
Tribunal is taking a short break. We will return with part two of the morning session. NR has said he expects to go until lunchtime with this witness.
AH - Angela Harrington, heard C's appeal of dismissal
Participants returning to the room.
J - dealing with sound issues clerk has moved microphones, and also some picking up typing sounds, that's probably me, further discussion.
NR - ground 2 of appeal was that she was dismissed for interpretation of tweets that was not put to her and that it was wrong to dismiss
Read 47 tweets
Tribunal Tweets Profile picture
May 19
The ET of Lorna Young vs Manchester City Council is expected to resume this morning, 19 May 2026, at 10 am. Image
Our complete coverage of the hearing to date can be found on our Substack here: open.substack.com/pub/tribunaltw…
Ms Young is taking her former employer, Manchester City Council, to employment tribunal for unfair dismissal on the grounds of religion or belief. Ms Young is a Catholic, holds gender critical beliefs. She was dismissed, among other grounds, for social media activity.
Read 60 tweets
Tribunal Tweets Profile picture
May 18
This is the second part of the day 6 afternoon session in Lorna Young vs Manchester City Council at employment tribunal. Part 1 is here
The court is currently taking a short break; after which Nathan Roberts barrister for the C will continue cross-examination of MCC witness Sharmila Kar.
[We resume]
NR: p1456 This is another OH report?
SK: Yes
NR: Last para b4 'conclusion' - advises advance notification for discussing things with C?
SK: Yes
Read 40 tweets
Tribunal Tweets Profile picture
May 18
Good afternoon; this is day 6 in the hearing at employment tribunal of Lorna Young vs Manchester City Council. Image
This morning's coverage is at
Our substack page on the case has our reporting from previous days, and a full list of abbreviations.tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/lorna-young-…
Read 102 tweets
Tribunal Tweets Profile picture
May 18
5 mins
NR They were all GC news
SN Yes
NR They'd whipped themselves up by finding a GC account
SN [missed]
NR On 16 Feb this letter to the C is about Ix into GG account
SN Yes
NR U use a passive voice, common from the R, re an initial Ix and whether to Ix further. U use
the same passive voice. Who did the initial review
SN Understand Nick McMillan looked at it and then referred account to HR
NR who concluded need further Ix
SN With HR but cant recall who
NR Who made the decison. Was it you
SN It was made w HR. I cant recall
NR U say an independent Ix and must caution you and give u a prelim warning it may be gross misconduct
SN Yes
NR Who decided the GG shld be treated as gross misconduct
SN I cant recall the detail. The policy of discrimination.
NR What was the GM
SN Re the tweets?
NR Yes
How the views expressed. Compatibility w the role
Read 27 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(