Udin v Chamsi Pasha  EWCA Civ 1249, 5th October 2012
Acting for the respondent employers in this appeal to the Court of Appeal, Bushra Ahmed led by Jonathan Goldberg QC successfully argued against the claimant employee’s appeal that the ET and EAT had been correct in their interpretation of the domestic worker exemption in regulation 2 of the National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999, in particular the requirement that, for the exemption to apply, the employee should be treated as a family member. One of the factors that regulation 2 requires to be taken into account is whether household tasks are shared between the claimant and the members of the household. The CA held that, in considering that factor, it would have been wrong to exclude work done under the contract from the scope of the duties that had to be shared, as the EAT might have appeared to suggest at one point. However, the appeal was dismissed as CA held that the ET had not misdirected itself.