Driving examiner dismissed for reckless driving and licence check failure: conduct dismissal upheld
A driving examiner with four years' service was fairly dismissed after driving recklessly on DVSA property and failing to check a candidate's licence. The tribunal rejected his claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #driving-examiner
- #reckless-driving
- #failure-to-check-licence
- #depression
- #disability-discrimination
- #acas-code-followed
Key facts
- The claimant was a driving examiner employed by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency from 4 January 2016.
- On 15 December 2019, the claimant drove an instructor onto a test surface at Leighton Buzzard, which the tribunal found was reckless.
- On 27 December 2019, the claimant allowed a candidate to take a motorcycle test without first checking their driving licence.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct on 26 August 2020 after an investigation and disciplinary hearing.
- The claimant had depression following his son's diagnosis of leukaemia, but the tribunal found no evidence of memory loss or that his disability caused the misconduct.
- The tribunal dismissed all claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, breach of contract, and unlawful deduction from wages.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Mr Ruddock began employment as an Examiner with the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency.
-
Son diagnosed with serious illness
Mr Ruddock's young son was diagnosed with a serious illness, impacting his mental health.
-
Appeal hearing - memory issues raised
At an appeal against a final written warning, Mr Ruddock said he could not remember things on several occasions.
-
Leighton Buzzard incident
Mr Ruddock drove an instructor onto the test surface at Leighton Buzzard; he later claimed it was to check a problem area.
-
Licence incident
Mr Ruddock allowed candidate DK to take a motorcycle test without first seeing his driving licence.
-
Ford Capri incident reported
A driving instructor reported seeing Mr Ruddock's black Ford Capri driven recklessly into the car park.
-
Suspension
Mr Ruddock was suspended from work pending investigation.
-
Disciplinary hearing
A disciplinary hearing was held; Mr Ruddock was accompanied by a colleague.
-
Dismissal
Ms Francis dismissed Mr Ruddock for gross misconduct, finding the Leighton Buzzard and licence allegations proven.
-
Appeal hearing
Mr Dormand heard the appeal and upheld the dismissal.
-
Appeal decision
Mr Dormand confirmed the dismissal in a letter.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed for misconduct, and whether the respondent discriminated against him because of his disability (depression) during the disciplinary process.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the respondent genuinely believed the claimant had driven recklessly on 15 December 2019 and failed to check a driving licence on 27 December 2019. The investigation and disciplinary process were reasonable, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses for gross misconduct.
On the disability discrimination claim, the tribunal accepted the claimant was disabled due to depression, but found no evidence that his disability caused the misconduct or that the respondent treated him unfavourably because of his disability. The respondent had made reasonable adjustments by allowing breaks during the hearing and considering his mental health.
No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can fairly dismiss for gross misconduct if they genuinely believe the employee committed the act and have carried out a reasonable investigation.
- A disability discrimination claim requires evidence that the employer's treatment was because of the disability, not just that the employee had a disability.
- Litigants in person should understand the legal tests before bringing claims; the tribunal explained that direct discrimination requires a causal link between the disability and the treatment.
- The ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary procedures was followed here, which helped the employer show the dismissal was fair.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates how employment tribunals assess fairness in misconduct dismissals. The driving examiner was dismissed after two incidents: driving recklessly on DVSA property with a member of the public in his vehicle, and failing to check a candidate's driving licence before a test. The tribunal focused on whether the employer genuinely believed the misconduct occurred, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and carried out a reasonable investigation.
The claimant argued that his depression, arising from his son's serious illness, affected his memory and contributed to the incidents. However, the tribunal found no evidence that his disability caused the misconduct or that the employer treated him unfavourably because of it. The employer had made adjustments, such as allowing breaks during the hearing, and the disciplinary process was conducted fairly.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant represented himself and withdrew several claims during the hearing after the tribunal explained the legal tests. This highlights the challenge for litigants in person in discrimination cases, where the burden of proof and causal links can be complex. The tribunal noted that the claimant was not familiar with the legal concepts, which is understandable but ultimately led to the failure of his discrimination claims.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case reinforces that employers can dismiss for misconduct even when the employee has a disability, provided the dismissal is for a fair reason and the employer follows a reasonable procedure. It also shows that employees bringing disability discrimination claims must show that their disability was a factor in the employer's decision, not just that they had a disability. The tribunal's detailed analysis of the investigation and decision-making process provides a useful benchmark for what constitutes a reasonable response in gross misconduct cases.
Similar cases
Dismissed after losing LGV licence due to depression: a failure to consider alternatives
A Transport Team Leader with 16 years' service was unfairly dismissed after his LGV licence was revoked due to depression. The tribunal found the employer failed to consider alternative roles or reasonable adjustments.
Tutor's disability discrimination claims dismissed after resignation
A tribunal dismissed all claims of disability discrimination, harassment, victimisation, and wrongful dismissal brought by a tutor with depression against her employer and individual managers.
Placed at risk of redundancy while on sick leave: disability discrimination claim succeeds
A former employee with PTSD was placed at risk of redundancy while on sick leave. The tribunal found it was discrimination arising from disability and awarded £12,183.
Bus driver dismissed after refusing to engage: tribunal upholds capability decision
A bus driver with 14 years' service was fairly dismissed for capability after he refused to attend occupational health appointments or engage with his employer. The tribunal also found no disability discrimination.