In the case of Hovis Ltd v Louton, Mr W Louton worked as a delivery lorry driver. A manager, Mr Sittre, reported that, when driving his car on the motorway, accompanied by his wife, both of them had seen Mr Louton driving his van on the same stretch of motorway and smoking at the wheel. Following an internal disciplinary investigation and process he was found to have been smoking whilst driving, which was a serious breach of the company’s procedures, and dismissed.
The tribunal found that Mr Louton was not unfairly dismissed. He did not appeal or cross-appeal from that decision. The tribunal upheld his claim of wrongful dismissal.
At the hearing in the employment tribunal Mr Louton gave evidence in person and denied that he had been smoking. Neither Mr Sittre nor Mrs Sittre gave evidence to the tribunal. The tribunal concluded that it therefore could not find as a fact that Mr Louton had been smoking. The employer appealed.
The EAT found that the tribunal erred by concluding that, in the absence of either Mr or Mrs Sittre giving evidence in person, it was precluded from making such a finding; and by failing to evaluate the hearsay evidence of the statements that had been gathered from the Sittres in the internal investigation.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
