{"id":59067,"date":"2026-06-22T11:06:53","date_gmt":"2026-06-22T09:06:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/?post_type=articles&p=59067"},"modified":"2026-06-26T11:07:08","modified_gmt":"2026-06-26T09:07:08","slug":"ad-2026-no-21-positive-drug-test-sufficient-grounds-for-summary-dismissal","status":"publish","type":"articles","link":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/en\/article\/ad-2026-no-21-positive-drug-test-sufficient-grounds-for-summary-dismissal\/","title":{"rendered":"AD 2026 No. 21 \u2013 Positive drug test sufficient grounds for summary dismissal"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

A warehouse worker, whose duties included operating a forklift truck, was summarily dismissed after testing positive for amphetamine in a random drug test carried out during working hours. The Labour Court found that there were valid grounds for summary dismissal.<\/em><\/p>\n

Background:<\/strong><\/p>\n

A warehouse worker\u2019s main duties were to operate a forklift truck, move pallets and pick goods in the warehouse. He was randomly selected for a drug test. The test proved positive for amphetamine, albeit at a low concentration, and the employee was summarily dismissed.<\/p>\n

The employer argued that the employee had grossly breached his duties to the company by deliberately using amphetamine to such an extent that the substance was still present in his body on the day the sample was taken \u2013 that is, the same day that he was operating a forklift truck whilst on duty in the company\u2019s warehouse operations, which involve significant safety risks. The employee thereby exposed himself and his colleagues to unacceptable risks. His conduct contravened the company\u2019s applicable rules and procedures, and the drug test had been carried out using an established testing method by an external party.<\/p>\n

The employee\u2019s representative disputed that the employee had had drugs in his system and, in any event, claimed that he had not been under the influence of drugs whilst at work. According to the employee\u2019s representative, the drug test was not reliable. Several objections were raised regarding both the method and process as well as the results: that the testing method was not sufficiently proven; that potential sources of error were not investigated when the employee denied having taken amphetamine; and that the product used in the test was no longer available on the market and had, moreover, passed its expiry date.<\/p>\n

The Labour Court\u2019s assessment:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Labour Court began by noting that if an employee, whose duties are such that it is manifestly dangerous or unlawful to perform them whilst under the influence of drugs, is found to have drugs in their system at work, this may normally be regarded as constituting a gross breach of the employee\u2019s duties towards the employer to such an extent that it justifies summary dismissal.<\/p>\n

The court further referred to previous case law (AD 2024 No. 46), in which it was established that, as long as there is no drug test that can reliably demonstrate that an employee is under the influence of drugs, a positive drug test \u2013 which reliably shows that the employee has at least previously taken drugs \u2013 may be regarded as giving reason to assume that the employee is under the influence of drugs until a subsequent drug test proves negative.<\/p>\n

With reference to this, and to the fact that there is currently no test that can reliably demonstrate that, or to what extent, a person is under the influence of drugs, the court ruled that, under the terms of the employment contract, an employee whose duties are clearly dangerous or unlawful to perform whilst under the influence of drugs may be deemed to have a duty to refrain from using drugs in such a way that any narcotic substance remains in their body whilst they are working or would have commenced work. The court noted that this applies provided there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the presence of the drug is due to the consumption of prescribed medication or that the employee did not consume the drug intentionally.<\/p>\n

Following an overall assessment, the Labour Court found that the positive test result was reliable and that it was beyond reasonable doubt that the employee had amphetamine in their system during working hours. The employee was unable to provide a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the presence of the drug, which is why the court concluded that the use had been deliberate and intentional. The court noted that it was therefore both dangerous and unlawful (a criminal offence) for the employee to operate a forklift truck whilst on duty. The fact that the employee had nevertheless done so meant that he had grossly breached his obligations to the company to such an extent that there were lawful grounds for summary dismissal.<\/p>\n

Setterwalls\u2019 comment:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Several conclusions of practical significance can be drawn from the judgment for both employers and employees. A key principle has been established, namely that employees whose duties are significantly dangerous or unlawful to perform whilst under the influence of drugs must not test positive for drugs at all \u2013 regardless of how low the concentration is and regardless of whether they are perceived to be, or perceive themselves to be, under the influence. The test must be negative. This principle applies not only to tasks such as forklift truck operation but also to other typically dangerous jobs or roles where it is unlawful to carry out the duties whilst under the influence. However, what specifically constitutes \u2018significantly dangerous or <\/em>unlawful\u2019 work must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.<\/p>\n

It is important for employers to note that the ruling does not imply a general right to summarily dismiss all employees who test positive for drugs. The established principle is clearly limited to work tasks that are specifically significantly dangerous or illegal to perform whilst under the influence of drugs. Uncertainty therefore remains as to what applies in the event of a positive drug test for employees whose duties are not typically dangerous or illegal, such as various types of office work. Further case law is needed to clarify the legal position in this regard.<\/p>\n

Employers wishing to create favourable conditions for a drug-free working environment are encouraged to introduce \u2013 and, where appropriate, negotiate \u2013 a clear drugs policy which, amongst other things, sets out a zero-tolerance approach to drugs and specifies how and when drug tests are carried out. The policy may also specify which work tasks are dangerous or illegal to perform whilst under the influence. The employer should also collaborate with an external party that offers quality-assured drug testing in accordance with established guidelines and standards.<\/p>\n

Setterwalls closely monitors developments and works continuously with its clients on these issues \u2013 both through firm measures such as termination of employment and summary dismissal, and through preventive measures such as the introduction of alcohol and drug policies and the development of systematic health and safety management.<\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":58938,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":true,"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":""},"article_category":[1043],"class_list":["post-59067","articles","type-articles","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","article_category-employment-and-pension-law"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articles\/59067","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articles"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/articles"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/58938"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=59067"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"article_category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/setterwalls.se\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article_category?post=59067"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}