This appeal is primarily concerned with the scope of the rights conferred on agency workers by and the Agency Workers’ Regulations 2010 (‘the AWR’), which implements the Agency Workers Directive (‘the Directive’) into domestic law. The EAT found that: (1) The right conferred by regulation 13(1) of the AWR (derived from Article 6.1 of the … Continue reading Angard Staffing Solutions Ltd and Another v Kocur and Another (Agency Workers and Contract of Employment): EAT 11 Dec 2020
The applicants sought to challenge the grant of a permit by the defendant to a company to operate a cement works, saying that the environmental impact assessment was inadequate. Held: The Agency had been justified in allowing the application in the form presented. Nor had there been inadeqate disclosure. Everything which was required to be … Continue reading Edwards, Regina (on the application of) v Environment Agency: HL 16 Apr 2008
EAT SEX DISCRIMINATIONBurden of proofPregnancy and discriminationUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Automatically unfair reasonsRegulation 10(3)(a) and Regulation 10(3)(b) of the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations 1999 must be read together in determining whether there is a suitable available vacancy under Regulation 10(2). Judges: Ansell J Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0544 – 09 – 2708, [2011] ICR 75 Links: … Continue reading Simpson v Endsleigh Insurance Services Ltd and Others: EAT 27 Aug 2010
Agency worker – Agency Workers Regulations 2010 – meaning of ‘agency worker’ The Respondent security company had employed the Claimant as a security guard on a ‘zero-hours’ contract for some 21 months. His contract had included a flexibility clause enabling the Respondent to assign him to different sites as required, although the Claimant was generally … Continue reading Brooknight Guarding Ltd v Matei (Agency Workers): EAT 26 Apr 2018
The Employment Tribunal found that the lead Claimant before it, Mr Kocur, was an agency worker within the meaning of Regulation 3 Agency Worker Regulations 2010. An appeal against that decision was dismissed. The issue turned on whether, pursuant to Regulation 3(1)(a), Mr Kocur was ‘supplied’ by the agency – Angard – to ‘work temporarily’ … Continue reading Angard Staffing Solutions Ltd and Another v Kocur and Others (Agency Workers): EAT 10 Jul 2020
The Claimant agency workers made complaints to the ET that their contracts of employment with the Respondent temporary work agencies (‘TWA’) did not comply with the requirements of Regulation 10(1)(a) of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (‘AWR’); and that in consequence the exemption from pay parity under Regulation 5 did not apply. The ET upheld … Continue reading Twenty-Four Seven Recruitment Services Ltd and Another v Afonso and 190 Others: EAT 16 Oct 2018
Scope of the rights conferred on agency workers by the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 Judges: Lord Justice Bean Lord Justice Singh And Lord Justice Green Citations: [2022] EWCA Civ 189 Links: Bailii, Judiciary Statutes: Temporary Agency Workers Directive, 2008/104/EC, Agency Workers Regulations 2010 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment, European Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.672024
Agency Workers – The Tribunal erred in finding that there had been compliance with Regulation 5(1) of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 in circumstances where the agency worker was only entitled to 28 days’ leave and 30 minutes paid rest breaks, whereas the hirer’s employees were entitled to 30.5 days leave and one-hour paid rest … Continue reading Kocur v Angard Staffing Solutions Ltd and Another: EAT 23 Feb 2018
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disposal of appeal including remission The Respondent to the appeal conceded that the Tribunal had erred in its approach to time limits in the Claimant’s claim for breach of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010. The parties could not agree whether the matter should be remitted back to the same or a … Continue reading Nwakwu v Westminster City Council: EAT 17 Sep 2018
EAT (Jurisdictional Points: Agency Relationships) Principles on which compensation to be assessed to be paid by hirer in circumstances in which it has been held liable for infringement of Regulation 5(1) Agency Workers Regulations 2010. Citations: [2016] UKEAT 0187 – 16 – 1312 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: … Continue reading Amissah and Others v Trainpeople.co.uk Ltd (Dissolved) and Another: EAT 13 Dec 2016
EAT Agency Workers – The Claimant argued that the Respondent was in breach of its obligations under Regulation 13 of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (‘the Regulations’), and Articles 5 and 6 of the Temporary Agency Worker Directive (2008/14/EC) (‘the Directive’) by denying him the opportunity to apply for the position he had temporarily been … Continue reading Coles v Ministry of Defence: EAT 31 Jul 2015
EAT Jurisdictional Points : Agency Relationships – The Appellants were employed for many years by the first Respondent but placed to work as agency workers at the premises, and under the supervision, of the second Respondent or its predecessor. They sought to argue that they qualified for protection under the Agency Workers Regulations 2010. They … Continue reading Moran and Others v Ideal Cleaning Services Ltd and Another: EAT 13 Dec 2013
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The applicant cleaner sought compensation for unfair dismissal. The issue was whether she was an employee of the respondents, of their client where she did her work, or was not an employee at all. She worked for an agency, who sent her out to offices to work. The court was called upon to give guidance … Continue reading Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd v Dacas: CA 5 Mar 2004
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods were taken lawfully. Held: The segregation was not authorised by the applicable legislation: ‘rule 45 . . (1) enables the governor … Continue reading Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 29 Jul 2015
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
False Imprisonment Damages / Immigration Detention The respondent had held the claimant in custody, but had failed to follow its own procedures. The claimant appealed against the rejection of his claim of false imprisonment. He had overstayed his immigration leave, and after convictions had served a prison sentence. When about to be released, an order … Continue reading Kambadzi (previously referred to as SK (Zimbabwe)) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 25 May 2011
The claimant appealed after her claim for sex discrimination had failed. She had been dismissed from her position an associate minister of the church. The court had found that it had no jurisdiction, saying that her appointment was not an employment. However the jurisdiction in sex discrimination cases was wider, extending to those who ‘contract … Continue reading Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission: HL 15 Dec 2005
Smartphone App Contractors did so as Workers The court was asked whether the employment tribunal was entitled to find that drivers whose work was arranged through Uber’s smartphone application work for Uber under workers’ contracts and so qualify for the national minimum wage, paid annual leave and other workers’ rights; or whether, as Uber contended, … Continue reading Uber Bv and Others v Aslam and Others: SC 19 Feb 2021
Liability in Damages on Statute Breach to be Clear Damages were to be awarded against a Local Authority for breach of statutory duty in a care case only if the statute was clear that damages were capable of being awarded. in the ordinary case a breach of statutory duty does not, by itself, give rise … Continue reading X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc: HL 29 Jun 1995
Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001
EAT Sex Discrimination: Indirect PART TIME WORKERS – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs Indirect Sex Discrimination – Equality Act 2010 section 19 On the indirect sex discrimination claim it was agreed that the Employment Tribunal (‘the ET’) erred in the identification of the pool for comparison. To that extent the appeal would be allowed. Applying … Continue reading Rajaratnan v Care UK Clinical Services Ltd: EAT 2 Jul 2015
LMA The claimants, a group of ex-employees sought arrears of wages on their employers’ insolvency. The European Directive required Member States to provide a guarantee fund to ensure payment of employees’ arrears of wages in the event of their employers’ insolvency. Since there was no prospect of claiming from their former employers, they brought their … Continue reading Francovich, Bonifaci and others v Italy: ECJ 19 Nov 1991
The parties had a joint venture agreement which provided that any dispute was to be referred to an arbitrator from the Ismaili community. The claimant said that this method of appointment became void as a discriminatory provision under the 2003 Regulations. The High Court found the appointment to be outwith the provisions, but this was … Continue reading Jivraj v Hashwani: SC 27 Jul 2011
The appellant, former chair of a road activist group, challenged certain roads orders saying that the respondent had not carried out the required environmental assessment. His claim was that the road had been adopted without the consultation required by the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (‘the SEA Directive’), and that that the scope of the public … Continue reading Walton v The Scottish Ministers: SC 17 Oct 2012
The twelve applicants had been unfairly dismissed by the transferor immediately before the transfer, and for a reason connected with the transfer under section 8(1). The question was whether the liability for unfair dismissal compensation transferred to the transferee. Held: It is the duty of a UK court to construe a statute, so far as … Continue reading Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd: HL 16 Mar 1989
Sympathetic construction of national legislation LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC Directive designed to protect companies and third parties from the adverse effects of the doctrine of nullity. … Continue reading Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA: ECJ 13 Nov 1990
