header-logo header-logo

26 January 2012
Issue: 7498 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Employment

Julio v Jose; Nambalat v Taher and another; Jose v Julio and other appeals UKEAT/0553/10/DM, [2012] All ER (D) 100 (Jan)

 

The exemption in reg 2(2) of the National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/584) should be narrowly interpreted. It had to be shown that the relevant individual had genuinely been treated as a member of the family unit. In applying the test, the worker’s place within the family had to be considered holistically. The wording of reg 2(2)(a)(ii) emphasised that “particular regard” had to be had to the provision of accommodation and meals and the sharing of tasks and leisure activities.

However, it did not exclude regard to other material matters, such as the general dignity with which a domestic worker was treated, the degree of privacy and autonomy they were afforded, and the extent to which, if at all, they had been exploited. What work the worker did under his or her contract of employment was not relevant for the purposes of considering whether that condition was satisfied. Regulation 2(2)(a)(ii) did not require the worker

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll