‘The entitlement to 5.6 weeks’ paid annual leave in the Working Time Regulations (WTR) is fairly straightforward to operate for full-time employees, working five days a week and paid a fixed salary. The employer just needs to let them take five weeks and three days off work, and carry on paying them their salary. Ever since the seminal judgment of the CJEU in BECTU we have known that the right in the parent Directive applies to all workers, without exception, from day one. But what does a right, expressed in weeks, mean for those, often misleadingly referred to as ‘atypical’ workers, who work only some days a week, only some weeks of the year or under a zero hours contract? What is the link, if any, between the time or hours worked and the period of annual rest?’
Old Square Chambers, 20th July 2022
‘Joel Wallace provides a review of the recent Supreme Court decision in Harpur Trust v Brazel  UKSC 21. A copy of the judgment can be found here. Topics include: annual leave entitlement, annual leave pay, zero-hour contracts, gig workers and irregular workers.’
Littleton Chambers, 28th July 2022
‘An additional bank holiday has been created in the UK this year to celebrate the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. Does this entitle a contractor to claim an extension of time? A client recently asked this question in the context of a project using the JCT Design and Build Contract 2016. It certainly throws up a number of issues.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 4th May 2022
There will be no posts over the Easter period. We will resume posting on 19th April 2022
There will be no posts during the Inner Temple Library’s Christmas closure period which starts at 2pm on 21st December. We will resume posting on 4th January 2022.
Happy Christmas and thanks for reading!
‘The Court of Appeal has found – albeit by a majority verdict – in favour of a defendant who offered no evidence to support their case and did not cross-examine the claimant’s instructed expert. The ruling on uncontroverted evidence in Griffiths v Tui will be a blow for personal injury firms with hundreds of holiday sickness claims waiting on the result.’
Law Society's Gazette, 7th October 2021
‘In an important case for package travel claims, the Supreme Court has clarified that a broad approach should be taken to determining the scope of the services provided under a package holiday contract. The tour operator is liable for the performance of ancillary services which are necessary to provide a holiday of the required standard.’
Devereux Chambers, 3rd August 2021
‘The Supreme Court unanimously allowed this appeal concerning whether a hotel employee working for the respondent was in breach of contract after having raped and assaulted the defendant, and/or gave rise to liability under the Contract and the Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992 (“the Regulations”).’
UKSC Blog, 30th July 2021