Walton v Independent Living Organisation Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 199 is a UK labour law case regarding the National Minimum Wage Act 1998

National Minimum Wage Act 1998

The National Minimum Wage Act 1998 creates a minimum wage across the United Kingdom, currently £6.08 per hour for workers aged 21 years and older, £4.98 per hour for workers aged 18–20...

.

Facts

Miss Julie Walton was a care worker, who looked after Miss E Jones, who had epilepsy

Epilepsy

Epilepsy is a common chronic neurological disorder characterized by seizures. These seizures are transient signs and/or symptoms of abnormal, excessive or hypersynchronous neuronal activity in the brain.About 50 million people worldwide have epilepsy, and nearly two out of every three new cases...

 but was a relatively easy client. She did washing, ironing, shopping and meals. Miss Walton was required to remain at work for 24 hours a day, and did three days a week. She was paid £31.40 a day and got allowance for meals and sleeping was free when she was with Miss Jones. The National Minimum Wage Team of the Inland Revenue

Inland Revenue

The Inland Revenue was, until April 2005, a department of the British Government responsible for the collection of direct taxation, including income tax, national insurance contributions, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, corporation tax, petroleum revenue tax and stamp duty...

contacted the company about a complaint. The employment agency sent in Miss Butler to do estimates about Miss Walton's hours of work and concluded her tasks took 6 hours and 50 minutes a day. Ms Walton agreed with this, and signed an agreement that this was in fact her hours of work.

Tribunal held that her time was ‘unmeasured’, and that the estimation was an agreement of time for the purpose of NMWR 1999 r 28, even though her whole pay was expressed on a daily basis. Therefore she was paid £4.60 which was over the minimum wage.

Judgment

Aldous LJ upheld the Tribunal. They had come to an agreement about the average hours of work. Arden LJ said it was a question of fact whether the worker did ‘only stand and wait’ and here she did not, and was able to do something entirely unrelated while at work. Jacob J concurred.