Harpur Trust v Brazel
A part year worker on a permanent contract is entitled to 5.6 weeks' paid holiday a year, calculated by reference to average weekly pay, without pro rating for the weeks not worked.
Facts
Mrs Brazel was a visiting music teacher at a school run by the Harpur Trust. She worked on a permanent contract, but only during school terms, and her hours varied. The trust calculated her holiday pay at 12.07 percent of her earnings, which was the method commonly used for casual workers, and which produced a lower figure than calculating it by reference to her average weekly pay over the preceding 12 weeks in which she was paid. She claimed that the method in the Working Time Regulations 1998 should be applied.
Legal principle
The Supreme Court held that Mrs Brazel was entitled to holiday pay calculated by the method in the Working Time Regulations, using her average weekly pay, without pro rating for the weeks she did not work. The court said that the regulations did not require pro rating for part year workers, and that the court could not read words into them to do so. The result was that part year workers could receive proportionately more holiday pay than full time workers, but this was a matter for Parliament. The government later changed the law for irregular hours and part year workers.
Related cases on whistleblowing, working time and pay
- British Airways plc v Williams [2012] UKSC 43, [2012] ICR 1375
- Chesterton Global Ltd v Nurmohamed [2017] EWCA Civ 979, [2018] ICR 731
- Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland v Agnew [2023] UKSC 33
- Federación de Servicios de Comisiones Obreras v Deutsche Bank SAE Case C-55/18, EU:C:2019:402
- Federación de Servicios Privados del sindicato Comisiones obreras v Tyco Integrated Security SL Case C-266/14, EU:C:2015:578
- Gilham v Ministry of Justice [2019] UKSC 44, [2019] 1 WLR 5905
- Kilraine v London Borough of Wandsworth [2018] EWCA Civ 1436, [2018] ICR 1850
- King v Sash Window Workshop Ltd Case C-214/16, EU:C:2017:914
Studying employment law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
