header-logo header-logo

Keep on trucking

istock_000001271407medium_4

David Renton examines how the Working Time Regulations apply to mobile workers

King Alfred the Great is supposed to have spent eight hours each day a week in prayer, eight hours in sleep, and only eight hours at work. The European Working Time Directive supplies our modern limits: workers’ rights to rest breaks, daily rest, weekly rest, maximum weekly working time and annual leave, which form an increasing part of all employment lawyers’ workload.

Ross v Eddie Stobart

In Ross v Eddie Stobart Ltd [2011] EAT/0085/10, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has had to consider two issues left unclear from the Working Time Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1833) (WTR) which implement the Directive: first, how far do these rights extend to workers who are partially excepted from the Regulations, and second, is the 48-hour limit capable of enforcement by way of an Employment Tribunal (ET) claim?

The claimant was a lorry driver who was required to work in excess of 48 hours per week over a 17-week period.

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

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll