Bus driver dismissed for sexual acts on bus: tribunal finds fair dismissal
A bus driver who performed oral sex on a woman while driving and used his mobile phone was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal also ordered him to pay £7,500 costs for pursuing hopeless discrimination claims.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #bus-driver
- #sexual-conduct-on-bus
- #mobile-phone-while-driving
- #gross-misconduct
- #involuntary-intoxication-defence
- #costs-order
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a bus driver from 10 November 2017 to 20 April 2020.
- On 25 February 2020, a member of the public complained about a man and woman engaging in sexual activity on the bus.
- CCTV footage showed the claimant performing oral sex on a woman and using his mobile phone while driving.
- The claimant was suspended on 14 April 2020 and dismissed for gross misconduct after a disciplinary hearing.
- The claimant alleged race, sex, and marriage discrimination, but provided no evidence.
- The tribunal found the dismissal fair and the discrimination claims unfounded, ordering the claimant to pay £7,500 costs.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working as a bus driver for M Limited.
-
Incident on bus
Claimant engaged in sexual acts with a woman on the top deck of his bus; a passenger complained.
-
CCTV reviewed
Accident Prevention Assistant N reviewed CCTV footage of the incident.
-
Suspension
Claimant was suspended after manager O viewed the CCTV and the claimant said he thought the footage would have been deleted.
-
First fact-finding meeting
Meeting with manager P; claimant admitted sexual acts and left early; he resigned but later retracted.
-
Second fact-finding meeting
Meeting with manager R; claimant claimed he was drugged; R recommended disciplinary hearing.
-
Disciplinary hearing
Hearing with S; claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct (sexual acts and mobile phone use).
-
Appeal hearing
Appeal heard by T; dismissal upheld based on mobile phone use alone.
-
Claim issued
Claimant filed employment tribunal claim.
-
Tribunal hearing
Substantive hearing over three days; claimant withdrew unlawful deduction claim.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal for gross misconduct was fair, and whether the disciplinary process was discriminatory on grounds of race, sex, or marriage.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It held that the employer had a genuine belief in the claimant's misconduct based on CCTV evidence and witness accounts, and followed a fair procedure. The claimant's allegations of race, sex, and marriage discrimination were unsupported by any evidence. The tribunal also ordered the claimant to pay £7,500 in costs, finding his claims had no reasonable prospect of success and were pursued unreasonably.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should ensure they have a genuine belief in misconduct based on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation.
- Employees who bring discrimination claims without any supporting evidence risk being ordered to pay the employer's costs.
- CCTV footage can be powerful evidence in misconduct cases, especially when it contradicts the employee's account.
- A fair disciplinary process, including suspension, fact-finding, a hearing, and an appeal, can protect a dismissal from being found unfair.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates how employment tribunals assess fairness in gross misconduct dismissals. The bus driver admitted to sexual acts on his bus and using his mobile phone while driving — both serious breaches of conduct rules. The employer's investigation was thorough: it reviewed CCTV footage, held fact-finding meetings, and gave the claimant opportunities to respond. The tribunal concluded that the employer genuinely believed the misconduct occurred and acted reasonably in dismissing him.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant argued he was involuntarily intoxicated and that the disciplinary process was discriminatory, but provided no evidence to support these claims. His failure to engage with the process — including resigning and then retracting — undermined his case. The tribunal noted his inability to specify how his protected characteristics affected his treatment. For employees facing disciplinary action, it is crucial to cooperate with the process and present clear, evidence-based arguments rather than unsubstantiated allegations.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case reinforces that employers can safely dismiss for gross misconduct when they have credible evidence and follow a fair procedure. It also serves as a warning that pursuing weak discrimination claims can lead to significant costs orders. The £7,500 costs award reflects the tribunal's view that the claims were unreasonable from the outset. Employees should think carefully before bringing multiple claims without a factual basis.
Similar cases
Bus driver dismissed after driving onto pavement to overtake: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 13 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after driving onto a pavement to overtake another bus. The tribunal rejected claims of race and religious discrimination.
Bus driver dismissed for refusing alcohol test after collision: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 6 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after refusing a breath alcohol test following an at-fault collision. The tribunal also dismissed his discrimination and victimisation claims.
Bus driver dismissed for using phone while driving: insufficient service bars unfair dismissal claim
A bus driver with only 7 weeks' service was dismissed for gross misconduct after using his mobile phone while driving. The tribunal struck out his unfair dismissal and race discrimination claims.
Shunter dismissed for using mobile phone while driving: conduct dismissal upheld
A shunter with six years' service was fairly dismissed after driving while using a hand-held phone and breaching a red light. The tribunal rejected claims that the dismissal was linked to earlier health and safety concerns.