Case 8000186/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Thomas v Africa in Motion (AIM) Film Festival Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000186/2024
- Decision date
- 8 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Kearns
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 1 October 2024 before Employment Judge M Kearns, the tribunal amended the respondent's address to 5 South Charlotte Street, Edinburgh, EH2 4AN. The judge then reconsidered the Legal Officer's 10 July 2024 refusal of the respondent's application for an extension of time to present an ET3, under Rule 20 and Regulation 10A(2) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
For the reasons given orally at the hearing, the extension application was refused. The practical effect was that the judgment issued on 10 April 2024 remained in force, subject only to the amendment of the respondent's address recorded in the October judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The respondent's application for an extension of time to present an ET3 was considered afresh under Regulation 10A(2) after the Legal Officer's 10 July 2024 refusal, and was refused; the judgment issued on 10 April 2024 therefore stood, subject to amendment of the respondent's address. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 20
- Regulation 10A(2) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.