Potting Construction Ltd v. Elliott [2000] UKEAT 680_00_2510 (25 October 2000)

The Chairman may have made a mathematical error in applying Regulation 13(2)(b), and the appeal raises a reasonably arguable point of law regarding the correct calculation of holiday entitlement.

Citation: [2000] UKEAT 680_00_2510
Parties: Appellant: Appellants; Respondent: Applicant
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 25 October 2000
Procedural Posture: Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome: Appeal to proceed to full hearing
Legal Topics: Holiday Pay, Working Time Regulations, Statutory Interpretation

Employment Law Holiday Pay Working Time Regulations Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Appellants

Appellant

Applicant

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Employment Tribunal Chairman erred in calculating the proportion of holiday entitlement under Regulation 13(2)(b) of the Working Time Regulations 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The Chairman may have made a mathematical error in applying Regulation 13(2)(b), and the appeal raises a reasonably arguable point of law regarding the correct calculation of holiday entitlement.

Court Disposition

Appeal to proceed to full hearing

Orders

Appeal listed for full hearing with Category B and time estimate of one to two hours