header-logo header-logo

10 October 2023
Issue: 8044 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-detail

Landmark judgment on underpaid holiday claims

Employment lawyers have welcomed a Supreme Court ruling that gaps of three months or more do not break a series of holiday underpayments when employees are bringing claims

The landmark judgment last week, Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland v Agnew [2023] UKSC 33, means thousands of police staff in Northern Ireland can claim up to 35 years' worth of miscalculated holiday pay.

The claimants, police officers and civilian staff, brought claims for miscalculated holiday pay dating back to 1998. The dispute concerned whether a statutory provision applied, time-barring claims for underpayments going back further than three months.

Colin Godfrey, employment lawyer at Taylor Wessing, said: ‘This means that gaps of more than three months will no longer prevent individuals bringing claims for a series of underpaid holidays.’

Andy Williams, partner, Stevens & Bolton, said: ‘Until [this judgment], the position in England, Wales and Scotland had been governed by the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s (EAT) 2013 finding in the case of Bear Scotland [Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton [2015] ICR 221 (EAT)], that a gap of more than three months in a series of underpayments was sufficient to extinguish the right to bring claims in respect of any earlier underpayments. 

‘Likewise, the EAT inferred that making a payment for holiday at the correct rate of pay could also break a series of deductions. The EAT’s finding in Bear Scotland has come under criticism and [this] judgment will come as no surprise to many.

‘The Supreme Court’s judgment will be of grave concern to many employers, as it greatly increases the potential cost of historic holiday pay claims. Employers in Great Britain (ie those in England, Wales and Scotland) may still, however, take comfort from the two year limit on historic holiday pay claims [under the Deduction from Wages (Limitation) Regulations 2014].’  

Issue: 8044 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll