Items with the keyword Working_Time_Regulations
- Uber BV and others v Aslam and others [2021] UKSC 5Appeal against an ET decision (upheld by the EAT and Court of Appeal) that Uber drivers were workers for the purposes of employment legislation and therefore entitled to be paid the minimum wage, to receive holiday pay and to benefit from other protections. Appeal dismissed.(19/02/2021) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Hall v London Lions Basketball Club (UK) Ltd UKEAT/0273/19/OOAppeal against the ET’s quantification of the Claimant’s damages for wrongful dismissal and entitlement to holiday pay. Appeal allowed.(01/09/2020) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Econ Engineering Ltd v Dixon and others UKEAT/0285/19/ATAppeal against the ET’s conclusion that a profitability bonus to which the Claimants were contractually entitled should be included in “the amount of a week’s pay”. Appeal allowed.(02/07/2020) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Pazur v Lexington Catering Services Ltd UKEAT/0008/19/LAAppeal against the ET’s judgment dismissing the Claimant’s claims of detriment and automatic unfair dismissal in respect of the Working Time Regulations 1998 (“WTR”). Appeal allowed.(24/09/2019) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- The Harpur Trust v Brazel [2019] EWCA Civ 1402Appeal against an EAT decision that calculated a part year worker's holiday entitlement as 5.6 weeks was dismissed.(06/08/2019) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Grange v Abellio London Ltd UKEAT/0304/17/JOJAppeal against the ET’s decision that the Claimant’s claim for breach of his entitlement to rest breaks (except in relation to a period of about two months) contrary to reg 12(1) Working Time Regulations 1998 (WTR) had been presented out of time; and cross-appeal by the Respondent against the ET’s award of compensation in respect of the period of claim for which it did have jurisdiction. Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed.(12/03/2019) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Saha v Capita Plc UKEAT/0080/18/DMAppeal against a ruling that the Claimant had not been subjected to detriments on the ground that she had made protected disclosures. Appeal allowed and remitted to the same ET.(17/12/2018) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Addison Lee Ltd v Lange & Ors UKEAT/0037/18/BAAppeal against a ruling that the Claimant's were limb (b) workers and that, as such, they were entitled to holiday pay and to the national minimum wage; also against a ruling that time when the drivers were logged on to the Respondent's system, other than break times, was working time. Both appeals dismissed.(15/11/2018) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Leyland & Ors v Hermes ET/1800575/2017An EJ has ruled that couriers for Hermes are limb (b) workers within the meaning of s230(2)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996, regulation 2(1) Working Time Regulations 1998 and s 54(3)(b) National Minimum Wage Act 1998.(20/07/2018) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake [2018] EWCA Civ 1641Appeal against an EAT ruling that the entirety of the period spent on the premises under sleeper-in arrangements must be taken into account in calculating an employer's obligations under the National Minimum Wage Regulations. Appeal allowed.(16/07/2018) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
56 items • page 1/6 • next
