All items: TUPE transfers

• expand

  (1) Perry's Motor Sales Ltd (2) Perry's Burnley Ltd v Lindley EAT/0616/07 (1 report relating to this case)

  • TUPE: Transferee that ordered pre-transfer dismissal liable for automatically unfair dismissal

    Date:

    15 September 2008

    In (1) Perry's Motor Sales Ltd (2) Perry's Burnley Ltd v Lindley EAT/0616/07, the EAT held that a transferee that ordered the pre-transfer dismissal of an employee who had previously brought proceedings against it was liable for automatically unfair dismissal regarding the assertion of a statutory right.

• expand

  Abellio London Ltd (formerly Travel London Ltd) v Musse and others; CentreWest London Buses Ltd v Musse and others [2012] IRLR 360 EAT (2 reports relating to this case)

  • TUPE: Change in place of work constituted substantial change in working conditions to employees' material detriment

    Date:

    26 September 2012

    In Abellio London Ltd (formerly Travel London Ltd) v Musse and others; CentreWest London Buses Ltd v Musse and others [2012] IRLR 360 EAT, the EAT held that the employment tribunal had been entitled to uphold claims that employees who resigned because of a TUPE transfer that involved a significant change in their place of work had been subjected to a substantial change in working conditions giving rise to a material detriment. They had therefore been unfairly dismissed pursuant to reg.4(9) of the TUPE Regulations 2006.

  • TUPE transfers: move to new location across London entitled employees to resign

    Date:

    13 March 2012

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that employees who resigned after being faced with a change of place of work to a different part of London because of a TUPE transfer were constructively dismissed. 

• expand

  Addison and others v Denholm Ship Management (UK) Ltd and others [1997] IRLR 389 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Transfer of undertakings: not covered by Transfer Regulations

    Date:

    1 November 1997

    The EC Business Transfers Directive and the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations do not extend territorially to cover the transfer of "flotels" servicing oil and gas installations situated in the UK sector of the North Sea continental shelf, holds the EAT in Addison and others v Denholm Ship Management (UK) Ltd and others.

• expand

  ADI (UK) Ltd v Willer and others [2001] IRLR 542 CA (1 report relating to this case)

  • Transfer of undertakings: Incoming contractor cannot avoid transfer Regulations by refusing to take on workforce

    Date:

    15 August 2001

    In ADI (UK) Ltd v Willer and others, a majority of the Court of Appeal holds that when there is a change of contractor providing a labour-intensive service and the incoming contractor does not take on the existing workforce, an employment tribunal is under a duty to consider the reason for that decision.

• expand

  Alamo Group (Europe) Ltd v Tucker and another [2003] IRLR 266 EAT (3 reports relating to this case)

  • Transfer of undertakings: Transferor's liability for failure to inform and consult passes to transferee

    Date:

    15 August 2003

    In Alamo Group (Europe) Ltd v (1) Tucker (2) Twose of Tiverton Ltd, the EAT holds that where a transferor fails to comply with its duty to inform and consult upon a relevant transfer, liability for that failure passes to the transferee under reg. 5 of the TUPE Regulations.

  • Case round-up

    Date:

    1 May 2003

    Our resident experts at Pinsent Curtis Biddle bring you a comprehensive update on all the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and advice on what to do about them.

  • Case round-up: TUPE and disciplinary warnings

    Date:

    8 April 2003

    This week's care round-up by Eversheds, covering: TUPE and disciplinary warnings.

• expand

  Ashford v Rossendale Transport Ltd and another ET/2405344/10 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Transfer of undertakings (TUPE): employment tribunal decisions

    Date:

    8 March 2012

    The cases below examine various issues arising under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE), including service provision changes; collective consultation; an employee's objection to the transfer and a substantial; and detrimental change to working conditions.

• expand

  Balcombe v Dye and another t/a The Lane End Public House ET/2400765/2013 (1 report relating to this case)

  • TUPE transfers: "no reason in law" why transferee cannot discipline employee for pre-transfer misconduct

    Date:

    16 October 2013

    This employment tribunal decision shows that there is nothing to stop a transferee from disciplining a transferred employee who is alleged to have committed misconduct before the transfer.

• expand

  Barlow v Allen t/a Associated Cleaning Services ET/2407598/09 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Loss of cleaning contract did not result in TUPE transfer

    Date:

    4 May 2010

    This case is a useful example of a tribunal's approach to whether or not there has been a TUPE transfer on a service provision change.

• expand

  Betts and others v Brintel Helicopters Ltd and KLM ERA Helicopters (UK) Ltd [1996] IRLR 45 HC (1 report relating to this case)

  • Transfer of undertakings: No jurisdiction to restrain dismissal of transferred employees

    Date:

    1 March 1996

    Employees were entitled to a declaration that their employment had automatically been transferred under the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations, when a new contractor took over from their employer a contract for the provision of helicopter services to and from North Sea oil rigs, holds the High Court in Betts and others v Brintel Helicopters Ltd and KLM ERA Helicopters (UK) Ltd.

• expand

  Birch and others v (1) Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council and (2) Sports and Leisure Management Ltd [1995] IRLR 518 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Transfer of undertakings: "Commercial venture" may be non-profit-making

    Date:

    1 October 1995

    In two recent cases, the EAT considers the application of the now repealed requirement that an undertaking had to be "in the nature of a commercial venture" in order to be covered by the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations.