Case 4107001/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Hume Bluebird Buses Limited v CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 In accordance with the power set out in — 2024
- Case reference
- 4107001/2023
- Decision date
- 7 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sent
- Venue
- Aberdeen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Hume Bluebird Buses Limited
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Hume brought an unfair dismissal claim against Bluebird Buses Limited. At the hearing, he accepted the respondent's account that he had received a final written warning on 23 August 2023 for conduct, that this warning had been reduced to a written warning on appeal on 12 September 2023, that he received a further final written warning on 15 September 2023, and that he was given a formal warning on 13 October 2023. He also accepted that a customer complaint was received on 2 October 2023 and that he was dismissed after that complaint.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant said the claim concerned the validity of the 23 August 2023 final written warning, but also told the tribunal he could not allege bad faith or that the warning was manifestly improper. He later said he wished to withdraw the claim, although the formal judgment records dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- General Dynamics Information Technology Ltd v Carranza
- Davies v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.