Anderson & Ors v City Of Sunderland Council [1998] UKEAT 1255_98_1712 (17 December 1998)

Anderson & Ors v City Of Sunderland Council [1998] UKEAT 1255_98_1712 (17 December 1998)

There is an arguable point of law as to whether hours habitually required but not guaranteed are 'fixed' for the purposes of Section 234(2) ERA 1996, warranting a full hearing.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1998] UKEAT 1255_98_1712
Parties
Appellant: Appellants; Respondent: Respondents
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 December 1998
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome
Matter directed to a full hearing
Legal Topics
Working Hours, Employment Contracts, Section 234 ERA 1996
Employment Law Working Hours Employment Contracts Section 234 ERA 1996

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellants

Appellant

Respondents

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether hours habitually required but not guaranteed are 'fixed' and constitute normal working hours under Section 234(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the Industrial Tribunal erred by conflating 'guaranteed' hours with 'fixed' hours

Ratio Decidendi

There is an arguable point of law as to whether hours habitually required but not guaranteed are 'fixed' for the purposes of Section 234(2) ERA 1996, warranting a full hearing.

Court Disposition

Matter directed to a full hearing

Orders

  • Matter to proceed to a full hearing before the Employment Appeal Tribunal
  • Parties to agree a common bundle of documents or exchange separate bundles at least 10 days before the hearing