header-logo header-logo

02 April 2015
Issue: 7647 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Lockdown on holiday pay

Employment tribunal makes important ruling on commission

Employers should include commission paid to workers when calculating holiday pay, an employment tribunal has held in Lock v British Gas Trading ET/1900503/2012.

Lock, a sales consultant with British Gas, claimed his holiday pay did not reflect what he would have earned in commission—his monthly commission fluctuated according to his sales.

The judgment follows the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling last year. The ECJ found a direct link between the monthly commission received by Lock and the performance of his tasks under his contract of employment. It ruled, therefore, that this commission must be taken into account by employers when making holiday payments under the European Working Time Directive (WTD), but left it to national courts to determine how this should be calculated.

Gary Henderson, Olswang partner, says the judgment means: “A week’s holiday pay for such employees must be calculated to include any commission or similar payments falling within the relevant reference period.

“The tribunal did not address what the reference period for such calculations should be, leaving this to be addressed at a further hearing. Nevertheless, the approach taken by the tribunal in adding the above wording to the WTR suggests that the reference period will be the period of 12 weeks immediately preceding the holiday (excluding any weeks where no remuneration was paid for any reason).”

ECJ principles only apply to the basic four week leave entitlement under the Directive, Henderson says. He pointed out that the Deduction from Wages (Limitation) Regulations 2014 (2014/3322) impose a two-year limit on most claims for backdated unlawful deductions from wages, where claims are presented on or after 1 July 2015.

Issue: 7647 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll