We covered an earlier EAT decision on this case in 2016, where it was established that, where an employer does not permit an employee to take statutory breaks under the WTR, it can amount to a refusal to allow the employee said breaks, even where the employee does not request them:

https://www.legal-island.com/articles/uk/case-law/2016/nov/grange-v-abellio-london-ltd-2016/

In this appeal, the employer sought to overturn a decision to award the employee £750 in compensation for personal injury - he had argued that the inability to take breaks (in effect because the employer 'refused' to allow him to take the required breaks) caused him 'discomfort and distress'.

The employer in this case cited Santos Gomes v Higher Level Care Ltd [2018] ICR 1571 and argued that the Court of Appeal had ruled that awards for injury to feelings and/or personal injury were not permitted. The EAT agreed that Santos did indeed exclude awards for injury to feelings under the WTR. However, it ruled that, "...the Court of Appeal does not exclude compensation for personal injury suffered in consequence of breach of the rest break provisions of the WTR."

There is nothing in previous judgments to state that awards under the WTR are limited to pecuniary loss alone. Awards for injury to feelings are excluded but those are different to awards for personal injury, according to the EAT. Soole J, sitting alone, commented:

"... as European Court authority makes clear, the object of the WTD is to ensure effective protection of the worker's health and safety... In that context it would be natural for a claim for breach of the WTR to allow such awards... Thus, in my judgment the decision of the Court of Appeal does not exclude compensation for personal injury suffered in consequence of breach of the rest break provisions of the WTR."

https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2018/0304_17_0810.html