There were two claimants in this case - one was a lay trade union representative and the other a health and safety representative. Both attended meetings before going on shift. Due to the timing of the meetings there might not be 11 hours between shifts, as required by the Working Time Regulations. The key question was whether or not those union activities constituted working time and, if they did, were they at the disposal of their employer, which would, in turn, activate the requirement of rest breaks between shifts.

The EAT has concluded that the meetings did constitute working time. The claimants may have been on union/health and safety duties but that was because the union was recognised by the employer - those duties benefitted the employment relationship; they were, in a broad sense, for the benefit of the employer, even though the claimants were not under the direct control of the employer:
http://bit.ly/1F9ifKK