HGV driver dismissed on the spot for refusing to drive without a rest break: unfair dismissal
An HGV driver who refused to drive to Stafford because he needed an 11-hour rest break was summarily dismissed without any investigation. The tribunal found the dismissal unfair and awarded £2,179.42, reduced by 50% for the driver's contributory conduct.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #hgv-driver
- #conduct-dismissal
- #summary-dismissal
- #no-investigation
- #contributory-conduct
- #driver-hours
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an HGV driver by the respondent, a licensed carrier.
- On 7 September, the claimant refused to drive a trailer to Stafford because he believed he needed an 11-hour rest break.
- The director, Mr Noguerol, dismissed the claimant on the spot without any investigation or procedure.
- The claimant had a history of warnings for tachograph infringements and driver hours breaches.
- The tribunal found the dismissal unfair because the employer did not carry out a reasonable investigation or follow a fair procedure.
- The claimant's conduct contributed to the dismissal, resulting in a 50% reduction in compensation.
Timeline
-
Warning for persistent breach of Driver's Hours
The claimant received a warning after three written reprimands for persistent breach of Driver's Hours rules.
-
Verbal warning for tachograph infringements
The claimant attended a disciplinary hearing and received a verbal warning for persistent tachograph infringements.
-
Verbal warning for disregarding driving rule
The claimant received a verbal warning for disregarding the '4:30h driving rule'.
-
Warning for persistent breach of Driver's Hours and Working Time Directive
The claimant received a warning due to persistent breach of Driver's Hours and Working Time Directive rules.
-
Refusal to drive to Stafford
The claimant refused to take a trailer to Stafford, citing the need for an 11-hour rest break. He was dismissed on the spot by Mr Noguerol.
-
Liability hearing
The tribunal heard the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint and found it well-founded.
-
Judgment on liability
The tribunal issued a judgment finding the dismissal unfair, with a 50% reduction for contributory conduct and Polkey.
-
Remedy hearing
The tribunal varied the judgment to remove the Polkey reduction, leaving a 50% reduction solely for contributory conduct, and awarded £2,179.42.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer acted reasonably in dismissing the driver for conduct, specifically whether it had a genuine belief based on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation, and whether dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses.
The outcome
The tribunal found the dismissal unfair because Logikal Network Limited did not carry out a reasonable investigation or follow a fair procedure before dismissing the HGV driver. The director dismissed the driver on the spot after he refused to drive to Stafford, citing the need for an 11-hour rest break.
The tribunal reduced the compensation by 50% due to the driver's contributory conduct, given his history of warnings for driver hours and tachograph infringements. The final award was £2,179.42, comprising:
- Basic award: £856.50
- Compensatory award: £1,172.92
- Loss of statutory rights: £150.00
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must carry out a reasonable investigation before dismissing for conduct, even if the employee has a history of similar issues.
- Summary dismissal without any procedure is likely to be unfair unless there is a clear and serious act of gross misconduct.
- Employees who refuse to work due to safety concerns (e.g., driver hours rules) should raise the issue formally and seek guidance, but employers should not dismiss without investigation.
- A history of warnings can reduce compensation if the employee's conduct contributed to the dismissal, but it does not make a procedurally unfair dismissal fair.
This case shows how a snap decision to dismiss an employee without any investigation can backfire, even when the employee has a poor disciplinary record. The HGV driver refused to drive a trailer to Stafford because he believed he needed an 11-hour rest break under driver hours rules. Instead of looking into the matter, the director dismissed him on the spot.
What the employer could have done differently
Logikal Network Limited could have avoided an unfair dismissal finding by carrying out a simple investigation. They could have checked the driver's hours, consulted the relevant regulations, and given the driver a chance to explain his concerns. Even if they still decided to dismiss, following a fair procedure would have made the dismissal potentially fair.
Why the result matters
The tribunal's decision reinforces that employers cannot bypass fair procedures, even when dealing with employees who have a history of misconduct. The 50% reduction for contributory conduct shows that the driver's own behaviour mattered, but it did not excuse the employer's failure to follow basic steps. For employees, this case highlights the importance of raising safety concerns properly, but also that employers must take those concerns seriously and investigate before taking drastic action.
Similar cases
Senior managers dismissed without investigation: unfair and wrongful dismissal
Five senior managers were summarily dismissed for gross misconduct without any investigation or appeal. The tribunal found the dismissals unfair and wrongful, and awarded unpaid wages, holiday pay, and notice pay.
Security officer dismissed by email without hearing: unfair but 100% contributory conduct
A tribunal found that a security officer with 13 years' service was unfairly dismissed after being sacked by email without any disciplinary hearing, but reduced her compensation to zero because her own conduct contributed entirely to the dismissal.
Transport manager dismissed for gross misconduct after following boss's instruction: unfair dismissal
A transport manager who was summarily dismissed for sending a cancellation email using his boss's name has won his unfair dismissal claim after the tribunal found the employer fabricated the reason. The case settled for £15,000.
Unfair dismissal over a discriminatory comment: when the investigation falls short
A mobile technician with 13 years' service was unfairly dismissed after describing a colleague as a 'female Eastern European woman' who 'always makes mistakes'. The tribunal found the employer's investigation was inadequate.