Webster (t/a Rooflines Direct) v. Miller [2001] UKEAT 785_00_2102 (21 February 2001)

Only the computation of holiday pay presents an arguable error of law; all other issues raised are matters of fact and not within the tribunal's remit for appeal.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2001] UKEAT 785_00_2102
Parties: Applicant: E Miller; Respondent: John Webster t/a Rooflines Direct
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 21 February 2001
Procedural Posture: Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing – Ex Parte
Outcome: Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics: Breach of Contract, Holiday Pay Computation, Seasonality in Earnings, Bonus Payment

Employment Law Breach of Contract Holiday Pay Computation Seasonality in Earnings Bonus Payment

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

E Miller

Applicant

John Webster t/a Rooflines Direct

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing – Ex Parte

Legal Issues

1 Whether the tribunal erred in computation of bonus payment
2 Whether seasonality should affect earnings calculation
3 Whether holiday pay was correctly computed

Ratio Decidendi

Only the computation of holiday pay presents an arguable error of law; all other issues raised are matters of fact and not within the tribunal's remit for appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

Holiday pay computation issue to proceed to full hearing
All other grounds of appeal dismissed

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.