Case 1600009/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Nicola Rolph v Iceland Foods Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 1600009/2025
- Decision date
- 4 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Hunt Tribunal
- Panel members
- Ms D Hebb, Mrs Y Neves
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Nicola Rolph
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that Nicola Rolph was unfairly dismissed by Iceland Foods Limited. The judgment records the outcome but does not set out the Tribunal's reasons, which were given orally at the hearing.
The remedy for unfair dismissal was reserved for a further hearing on a date to be confirmed. At that hearing, the Tribunal will also consider whether any adjustment should be made under section 207A(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. No monetary award was recorded in this judgment.
Rolph's victimisation claim was dismissed on withdrawal under rules 50 and 51 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024; it was not determined on its merits in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Remedy was reserved for determination at a further hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Victimisation | The claim was dismissed on withdrawal under rules 50 and 51 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.