Webster (t/a Rooflines Direct) v. Miller [2001] UKEAT 785_00_1012 (10 December 2001)

Webster (t/a Rooflines Direct) v. Miller [2001] UKEAT 785_00_1012 (10 December 2001)

The appeal was dismissed because the factual basis for the appellant's argument—that the payments were not salary but advances on commission—was contradicted by the appellant's own admissions that the payments were salary and not recoverable. Therefore, there was no error of law in the Tribunal's computation of holiday pay.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 785_00_1012
Parties
Appellant: Mr J Webster; Respondent: Mr E Miller
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
10 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Holiday Pay, Commission Based Employment, Working Time Regulations, Computation of Wages
Employment Law Holiday Pay Commission Based Employment Working Time Regulations Computation of Wages

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr J Webster

Appellant

Mr E Miller

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in its computation of holiday pay for a commission-based employee under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and Employment Rights Act 1996.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the factual basis for the appellant's argument—that the payments were not salary but advances on commission—was contradicted by the appellant's own admissions that the payments were salary and not recoverable. Therefore, there was no error of law in the Tribunal's computation of holiday pay.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No remission to the Tribunal
  • Original Tribunal decision on holiday pay stands