Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2004] All ER (D) 121 (Nov)
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Peter Gibson, Buxton and Jacob LJJ
Representation Andrew Hogarth QC (instructed by OH Parsons & Partners) for the employees.
  Peter Oldham (instructed by Berwin Leighton Paisner) for the employer.
Judgment Dates: 8 November 2004

Catchwords

Employment - Working time - Worker's hours exceeding statutory maximum - Rest-break - Continuity of service - Airline catering - Employment tribunal finding workers' activities involving need for continuity of service - Employment Appeal Tribunal finding workers wrongly denied protection in respect of working hours - Correctness of decision - Working Time Regulations 1998, SI 1998/1833, regs 12(1), 21(c).

The Case

On the proper construction of reg21(c) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, which had the effect of setting aside the requirement for a rest break contained within reg12(1) of the Regulations where the worker's activities involved the need for continuity of service or production, the test for continuity of employment focused on the activities and work patterns of the worker, rather than the employer.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.

Lexis®Library

  • The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
  • Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
  • Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary