HGV driver dismissed after employer doubted his back injury: unfair dismissal upheld
A tribunal found that an HGV driver with 12 years' service was unfairly dismissed after his employer lost trust in him over a back injury suffered in Poland. He was awarded £13,335.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant worked as an HGV driver for the respondent from 14 November 2008 until dismissal on 17 May 2021.
- The claimant suffered a back injury in Poland on 3 August 2020 and provided medical evidence of his condition.
- The respondent doubted the authenticity of the claimant's medical documents and lost trust in him.
- The claimant obtained clearance from his GP, a spinal surgeon, and the DVLA to return to work by April 2021.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant citing concerns about his fitness to drive, but the tribunal found the real reason was suspicion of misconduct.
- The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim but dismissed the race discrimination claim.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced working for the respondent as a class 1 HGV driver.
-
Injury in Poland
Claimant suffered a fall and seriously injured his back while on holiday in Poland.
-
Injury reported
Claimant's son informed the respondent of the injury; respondent requested proof.
-
Fit notes start
Claimant provided consecutive fit notes from his UK GP stating he was unfit for work due to a vertebral fracture.
-
Respondent accuses of false report
Respondent's Mumtaz Abdullah accused the claimant of providing a false medical report and threatened disciplinary action.
-
Meeting with respondent
Claimant met with Mr Abdullah; claimant said it was positive, but respondent's notes alleged gross misconduct.
-
DVLA clearance
Claimant received DVLA letter confirming his licence was valid and he satisfied medical standards for safe driving.
-
Specialist clearance
Professor Shad, a neuro and spinal surgeon, confirmed the claimant was fit to return to work as an HGV driver.
-
Dismissal
Respondent sent a letter terminating the claimant's employment, citing concerns about his fitness to drive.
-
Final hearing starts
Employment tribunal hearing commenced at Cambridge Employment Tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal was unfair and whether it amounted to race discrimination. It also considered claims for notice pay and unpaid wages.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim, finding that the employer's stated reason—concerns about fitness to drive—was not the real reason. The real reason was a loss of trust based on suspicion that the claimant's medical documents were false, but the employer did not carry out a reasonable investigation before dismissing.
The race discrimination claim was dismissed as there was no evidence that the claimant's Polish nationality played any part in the decision.
The claimant was awarded:
- Basic award: £9,792.00
- Compensatory award: £1,311.75
- Notice pay: £2,231.59
- Unpaid wages: £0.00 (awarded for a specific period but offset)
- Total: £13,335.34
Lessons & takeaways
- If an employer suspects a medical document is false, they must investigate properly before dismissing—simply doubting it is not enough.
- Long-serving employees (12 years here) are entitled to a fair process; a failure to investigate can make a dismissal unfair.
- Obtaining clearance from a GP, specialist, and DVLA is strong evidence of fitness to work—employers should not ignore such evidence.
- Race discrimination claims require evidence that the protected characteristic influenced the decision; suspicion alone is insufficient.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights the risks employers take when they let suspicion override process. The HGV driver, who had worked for the company for 12 years, suffered a serious back injury while on holiday in Poland. He provided medical evidence, but the employer doubted its authenticity and lost trust in him. Despite the driver obtaining clearance from his GP, a spinal surgeon, and the DVLA to return to work, the employer dismissed him, citing concerns about his fitness to drive. The tribunal found that the real reason was suspicion of misconduct—but no proper investigation was carried out.
What the losing side could have done differently
The employer could have avoided this outcome by conducting a reasonable investigation into the authenticity of the medical documents before making a decision. Instead, they accused the driver of providing a false report and threatened disciplinary action without gathering evidence. The tribunal noted that the employer's director, Mr Abdullah, appeared to have made up his mind early on. A fair process would have involved seeking independent verification, giving the driver a chance to explain, and considering the overwhelming medical evidence that cleared him to drive.
Why the result matters for similar claims
For employees, this case is a reminder that even if an employer loses trust, they must still follow a fair procedure—especially for long-serving staff. The tribunal's decision to award a basic award of nearly £10,000 reflects the driver's length of service. For employers, it shows that dismissing on suspicion without investigation is likely to be unfair. The race discrimination claim failed because there was no evidence that the driver's Polish nationality influenced the decision—but the unfair dismissal claim succeeded on procedural grounds.
Similar cases
Dismissed while on sick leave: fixed-term contract not renewed without consultation
A mental health practitioner with 15 years' experience was unfairly dismissed when her fixed-term contract was not renewed while she was on long-term sick leave. The tribunal awarded £33,443.28.
Dismissed while on sick leave: employer ignored offer of imminent return
A tribunal found that EE Limited unfairly dismissed a broadband technical support worker with panic disorder after it refused to wait a week for her to return to work, and also discriminated against her because of her disability.
Paramedic dismissed after 22 years: ill-health dismissal was fair despite disability
A paramedic with 22 years' service lost his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims after the tribunal found his employer acted reasonably in dismissing him for ill-health when his own psychiatrist said he was permanently incapable of working.
Senior bookseller dismissed without notice after 13 years: procedural failings led to unfair dismissal
A senior bookseller with 13 years' service was unfairly dismissed after being summarily dismissed during an investigation meeting. The tribunal awarded £11,471.80, including a 12.5% uplift for failing to follow the ACAS Code.