Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Barber v RJB Mining UK Ltd

[1999] ICR 679

Case summary last updated at 19/02/2020 20:31 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Barber v RJB Mining UK Ltd

Ps worked for D 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. 

Barber v RJB Mining UK Ltd crops up in following areas of law