Claimant v Cardiff City Transport Services Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair because: (1) the employer lacked reasonable grounds for believing the claimant had breached internal health and safety rules or external regulations (Highway Code, Traffic Commissioner rules) – the prohibitions applied to using mobile phones whilst driving, not whilst stationary; (2) the investigation fell outside the band of reasonable responses, failing to verify the rules allegedly breached despite express challenge by the claimant's representative; (3) the decision to dismiss was unreasonable given the beliefs lacked reasonable foundation and the investigation was inadequate.
Facts
The claimant, a bus driver with 7 years' service and a clean disciplinary record, was dismissed for gross misconduct after using his mobile phone for 36 seconds whilst standing in the saloon area of his stationary bus with the engine running, waiting in a queue to refuel at the depot after finishing his shift. He was checking for messages from his disabled wife. The respondent alleged he breached health and safety rules, the Highway Code, and Traffic Commissioner guidance prohibiting mobile phone use whilst 'operating' a vehicle. The claimant maintained he had not been driving and believed the prohibition only applied to phone use whilst actually driving or in the cab.
Decision
The tribunal found the dismissal unfair. The employer lacked reasonable grounds for believing the claimant had breached any internal or external rules, as the prohibitions clearly applied to using phones whilst driving, not whilst stationary outside the cab. The investigation was inadequate, failing to verify the actual content of the rules allegedly breached despite being challenged on this point. The decision to dismiss fell outside the band of reasonable responses. The claimant was awarded a basic award of £5,876 plus £500 for loss of statutory rights, uplifted by 15% for failure to follow the ACAS Code.
Practical note
Employers must ensure disciplinary decision-makers have actually reviewed and correctly understood the specific rules alleged to have been breached, particularly when the employee challenges the interpretation of those rules, otherwise the dismissal risks being unfair for lack of reasonable grounds and inadequate investigation.
Award breakdown
Adjustments
Respondent failed to comply with ACAS Code on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures, particularly Paragraph 4 (investigations); failure was unreasonable; 15% uplift awarded
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1602418/2024
- Decision date
- 8 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Bus Driver
- Service
- 7 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister