Driver v Air India Ltd

In assessing unpaid employment-related sums, the court should apply the contractual rates, periods and thresholds established by the substantive findings. Overtime falling within a contractual threshold is not payable. Where payment above the threshold is discretionary, the court may assess what a rational exercise of that discretion would have produced. Repetitive schedules may be recalculated on a reasonable approximation where exact arithmetic is impracticable. Discretionary interest may be awarded on the aggregate judgment sum from the date by which the employer should reasonably have resolved the claims, rather than separately from each payment date.

The claimant appealed in proceedings against Air India from the Queen’s Bench Division before His Honour Judge Seymour, claim number HQ08X01806. The Court of Appeal had already determined the substantive contractual parameters in its main judgment. The parties were then invited to make further written submissions on the figures. This judgment determines the sums due for car, telephone and shift allowances, overtime, and discretionary interest.

The Court of Appeal made its final quantum determination.

1. The car allowance was assessed at £100 per month from September 2001 to June 2006, producing £5,800. Telephone expenses were assessed at £31 per month for the same period, producing £1,798. The shift allowance produced £11,624.86, applying the rates and periods identified in the substantive judgment.
2. Overtime under the first contract was payable for hours above 37.5 per week from 1 January 2002 to 30 June 2006. Under the second contract, overtime above 48 hours per week was within Air India’s discretion from 1 July to 31 December 2006. The court found that a rational decision-maker would have exercised that discretion in the claimant’s favour.
3. The second-contract schedules incorrectly claimed overtime up to 48 hours. The court recalculated the repetitive claims by applying a reasonable percentage to the hours claimed. Overtime was assessed at £57,845.40.
4. The total claim was £77,068.26, and judgment was entered for the claimant in that sum.
5. The court rejected interest calculated separately from each date on which an item should have been paid. It awarded simple interest on the judgment sum at 8% from 1 February 2007 to 31 August 2008, and at 5% from 1 September 2008 to 19 July 2011. Thereafter, the judgment rate applied.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): In [2011] EWCA Civ 986, on appeal from the Queen’s Bench Division before His Honour Judge Seymour, the court determined final quantum and entered judgment for the claimant for £77,068.26 plus interest.