This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Barber v RJB Mining UK Ltd [1999] ICR 679

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 07/01/2024 17:02

Judgement for the case Barber v RJB Mining UK Ltd

Table Of Contents

  • Plaintiffs worked for Defendant after working time regulations came in, and refused to sign an opt out of 48 hour average week under regulation 4(1) WTR.

  • Court held that the requirements of Reg 4(1) and Reg 4(2) were separate obligations, each of which was actionable (first is obligation not to require an employee to work longer, unless consent is given, and second is duty to take reasonable steps to ensure this).

    • Therefore court granted a declaration that, having worked in excess of 816 hours, the plaintiffs need not work until such time as their average working time fell within the limits specified by Regulation 4(1).

    • However any substantive remedy (damages, injunctions etc) would need to be granted by the Employment Tribunal, on whom the regulations confer exclusive jurisdiction.

Gage J

  • Reading both parts of Reg 4 would dramatically weaken 4(1) and this wasn’t what was intended. 

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on Barber v RJB Mining UK Ltd

Labour Law Notes
1,003 total pages
273 purchased

Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Labour Law Notes
1,003 total pages
273 purchased

Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...