header-logo header-logo

20 October 2011
Issue: 7486 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Employment

Seaton v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2011] UKUT 297 (TCC), [2011] All ER (D) 87 (Oct)

Where an employer failed to pay an employee wages to which the employee was entitled, the fact that an employee received no income was not a circumstance which fell within the exception provided by Sch 11, para 2(c) of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992. The Parliamentary intention was shown by the words “normal weekly earnings” in Sch 11, para 2(c) which, on their ordinary meaning had to mean the actual entitlement under the contract of service.

There was no need to seek to adopt a purposive construction of the special definition in s 163(2) that produced a different result by, for example, deeming something less than the lower earnings limit to have been paid when in fact nothing had been paid.
 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll