Case 3320088/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Hammoudan v London United Busways Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3320088/2019
- Decision date
- 14 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Hammoudan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed as a bus driver and was summarily dismissed after his bus became stranded on the central island of a roundabout while he was attempting to get past a stationary bus. The tribunal found that the respondent dismissed him for conduct, a potentially fair reason, and that the claimant had accepted during the disciplinary process that he was at fault and that the incident could have brought the respondent into disrepute.
The tribunal found the investigation reasonable and held that the respondent was entitled to treat the claimant's action as deliberate. It rejected the claimant's arguments that the wrong policy had been used, that the sanction relied on three charges, and that length of service, good service or lesser sanctions had not been considered. Although the tribunal accepted dismissal may have been harsh, it held that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses and that the procedure was fair.
For the wrongful dismissal claim, the tribunal made its own findings about the manoeuvre and found that the claimant consciously drove a significant way onto the central island when other options were available. It concluded that this was gross misconduct and a repudiatory breach of contract, so the respondent was not required to pay notice pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the dismissal was for the potentially fair reason of conduct, was substantively and procedurally fair, and fell within the band of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant's conduct amounted to gross misconduct and a repudiatory breach of contract, releasing the respondent from any obligation to pay notice pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
13 references- s98 ERA 1996
- British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell
- band of reasonable responses
- Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones
- Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt
- London Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Small
- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd
- Taylor v OCS Group Ltd
- Enable Care and Home Support Ltd v Pearson
- s122(2) ERA
- s123(6) ERA
- Nelson v BBC (No.2)
- Steen v ASP Packaging Ltd
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.