Case 1601292/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Hardy-Popa v Iceland Foods Limited and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 1601292/2018
- Decision date
- 24 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harfield Members
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Mr M Pearson, Mrs M Walters
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs K Hardy-Popa
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously decided that the claimant's complaint of constructive unfair dismissal against Iceland Foods Limited was not well founded and dismissed it.
The tribunal also unanimously decided that the claimant's complaint of disability discrimination against Iceland Foods Limited and Mr G Robinson was not well founded and dismissed it. Oral reasons were provided on 17 January 2020, and the judgment records that written reasons had been requested and would be provided in due course.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment records the complaint as constructive unfair dismissal against the first respondent and says it was not well founded and dismissed. No written reasons are included in the supplied text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records the disability discrimination complaint against both respondents as not well founded and dismissed. No written reasons are included in the supplied text. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.