Hartley and Others v King Edward VI College: SC 24 May 2017

The teacher appellants challenged the quantification of deductions from their salaries after engaging in lawful strike days.
Held: The appeal as allowed. The correct approach under section 2 to a case like this, where the contract is an annual contract, is to hold that the salary must be apportioned on a calendar day basis over 365 days, which yields a daily figure of 1/365.
Lord Clarke said: ‘I do not think that the contracts of employment provide expressly or by necessary implication for their salaries to be paid to staff pro rata in respect of divisible obligations to perform work on each day of directed time.’
Section 2 of the Act applied in this case and was not excluded by section 7. As to the questions posed in para 8 above, I would hold that (a) section 2 of the Act applied to this case, (b) that ‘accruing from day to day’ means accruing calendar day by calendar day and (c) that section 7 of the Act has the meaning discussed in paras 38 to 41 above and does not apply on the facts of this case.


Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Hughes, Lord Gill


[2017] UKSC 39, [2017] 4 All ER 637, [2017] ICR 774, [2017] IRLR 763, [2017] 1 WLR 2110, [2017] ELR 395


Bailii, Bailii Summary


Apportionment Act 1870




CitedSim v Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council 1981
The 1870 Act applied where an employee’s contract was terminated in the course of a period at the end of which payment would be made. Scott J said: ‘Mr Goudie submitted that the real question was whether a teacher was entitled to be paid for the . .
CitedFassihim, Liddiardrams, International Ltd, Isograph Ltd v Item Software (UK) Ltd CA 30-Sep-2004
The first defendant (F) had been employed by a company involved in a distribution agreement. He had sought to set up a competing arrangement whilst a director of the claimant, and diverted a contract to his new company.
Held: A company . .
Appeal fromHartley and Others v King Edward VI College CA 14-May-2015
The claimant teachers had been involved in a day’s strike action They objected that the employer had deducted 1/260 and not 1/365 of their annual salary.
Held: Section 2 of the 1870 Act did apply to a teacher’s contract, and the employee’s . .
CitedMiles v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council HL 1987
The claimant was a superintendent registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages. His union instructed him not to conduct weddings on Saturdays. He had been told that if he failed to perform his full range of duties on a Saturday (including marriages), he . .
CitedAmey v Peter Symonds College QBD 2013
The claimant was a full time teacher at a sixth form college who went on strike. He participated in two days of industrial action. He argued that the College acted unlawfully in deducting 1/260 of his salary rather than 1/365 for each day on strike. . .
CitedThames Water Utilities v Reynolds EAT 22-Nov-1995
HH Judge Clark: said this by reference to the expression ‘from day to day’ in section 2: ‘Accordingly the real question is what is meant by the expression ‘from day to day’ in section 2 of the Act. In our view it can only be calendar days and not . .
CitedLeisure Leagues UK Ltd v Maconnachie EAT 14-Mar-2002
When calculating the entitlement to holiday pay the apportionment had to be made on the number of working days in a year, not on the number of days in a year. The regulations required this interpretation rather than that under the Act. A consequence . .
CitedYarrow v Edwards Chartered Accountants EAT 8-Jun-2007
Holiday Pay
Appeal allowed against Chairman’s order dismissing complaint without considering all information supplied by parties (ET Rule 27(6)). Application of working . .
CitedCooper and others v The Isle of Wight College QBD 30-Nov-2007
. .
CitedTyrrell v Clark 17-Jan-1854
The stat. 4 and 5 Will. 4, c. 22, requires, in order to exclude apportionment, either an express direction that there shall be none, or language so express in the terms of gift that apportionment is clearly impossible consistently with it. Inference . .
CitedIn re Lysaght CA 1898
The testator bequeathed certain shares and declared that they ‘shall carry the interest accruing thereon at my death.’
Held: But for this clause the Apportionment Act would have allowed the residuary legatees to take the benefit of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Education

Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.584230