HGV driver dismissed over unreported spillages and evidence tampering: conduct dismissal upheld
An employment tribunal has upheld the dismissal of an HGV driver with six months' service who failed to report two spillages and was found to have damaged a tachograph and deleted dashcam footage after a third incident.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #spillage
- #tachograph-damage
- #dashcam-deletion
- #health-and-safety-grievance
- #automatic-unfair-dismissal
- #acas-code-breach
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an HGV driver from 30 September 2019 until 17 March 2020.
- The claimant was involved in three spillage incidents on 27 January, 9 March, and 11 March 2020.
- The claimant failed to report the first two spillages as required by the respondent's policies.
- The respondent found that the tachograph was damaged and dashcam files were deleted after the 11 March incident.
- The claimant sent a grievance letter raising health and safety concerns after his dismissal.
- The tribunal found the principal reason for dismissal was the claimant's conduct regarding the spillages, not the health and safety concerns.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
The claimant started work as an HGV driver for the respondent.
-
First spillage incident
A spillage occurred while the claimant was driving; he did not report it.
-
Second spillage incident
Another spillage occurred; the claimant again failed to report it.
-
Third spillage incident
The claimant swerved to avoid a pallet, causing a large spillage. He reported this incident.
-
Investigation meeting invited
The claimant was invited to an investigation meeting regarding the three spillages and evidence tampering.
-
Dismissal
At the investigation meeting, the claimant was dismissed with immediate effect for conduct related to the spillages.
-
Grievance sent
After dismissal, the claimant emailed a grievance letter raising health and safety concerns.
-
Dismissal confirmed in writing
The respondent sent a letter confirming the dismissal and offering one week's pay in lieu of notice.
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented his claim to the employment tribunal.
-
Final hearing began
The substantive hearing took place over three days.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed because he raised health and safety concerns, or whether the dismissal was for a different reason — here, his conduct.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim for automatic unfair dismissal.
The key reason was that the principal reason for dismissal was the claimant's conduct — specifically, his failure to report two spillages, and the damage to the tachograph and deletion of dashcam files after the third incident. The health and safety grievance was only raised after dismissal and was not the reason for it.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you raise a health and safety concern, make sure it is clearly communicated before any disciplinary action — raising it after dismissal may not protect you.
- Employers can dismiss for conduct even with short service, provided they have a genuine belief in the misconduct and follow a fair process.
- Failing to report incidents and tampering with evidence are serious matters that can justify dismissal, especially in safety-critical roles.
- The automatic unfair dismissal protection for health and safety only applies if the health and safety concern was the principal reason for dismissal.
When conduct trumps health and safety concerns
This case shows how difficult it can be to succeed with an automatic unfair dismissal claim based on health and safety when the employer has strong evidence of misconduct. The claimant, an HGV driver with only six months' service, was dismissed after three spillage incidents in quick succession. The first two went unreported, and after the third, the employer found the tachograph damaged and dashcam footage deleted.
The driver argued he was dismissed because he raised health and safety concerns about the trailers and the practice of changing trailers in lay-bys. However, the tribunal found that his grievance was only sent after the dismissal meeting, and the employer's decision was driven by the conduct issues — not the health and safety complaint.
What the employer did right
The respondent had clear policies requiring drivers to report spillages. They investigated promptly, held a meeting, and gave the claimant an opportunity to explain. Despite his limited service, the tribunal accepted that the employer genuinely believed in the misconduct and that dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses. The case highlights that even short-service employees can be fairly dismissed for gross misconduct if the evidence is clear.
Why this matters
For employees, this is a reminder that the timing of a health and safety complaint matters. Raising concerns during employment may offer protection, but raising them after dismissal will not retroactively make the dismissal automatically unfair. For employers, it confirms that a thorough investigation and clear policies are key to defending conduct dismissals, even when the employee later raises health and safety issues.
Similar cases
Gymnastics coach dismissed after asking for contract and payslips wins automatic unfair dismissal claim
A gymnastics coach was automatically unfairly dismissed after asserting her right to a written contract and payslips. The tribunal awarded £56,202 including compensation for unlawful wage deductions.
TUPE transfer and automatic unfair dismissal: employee wins after asserting statutory rights
A former employee of Plau Bistro Limited was automatically unfairly dismissed after asserting a statutory right following a TUPE transfer. The tribunal awarded £2,396.23 for unpaid wages, holiday pay, and notice pay.
Pregnant chef dismissed after requesting time off for pregnancy-related illness
A chef was automatically unfairly dismissed when her employer fired her by message after she requested time off for pregnancy-related bleeding. The tribunal awarded £18,479 for unfair dismissal, discrimination, and unauthorised deductions.
Whistleblowing dismissal: two employees win automatic unfair dismissal claims
Two former employees of Bridge Medical Solutions Ltd have won their claims for automatic unfair dismissal after being sacked for making protected disclosures. The tribunal awarded a total of £27,286 in compensation.