An Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employee, not working in his employer's business because of health problems, but retained as an employee to receive permanent health insurance (PHI) payments, was not "assigned" to the organised grouping of employees for the purposes of a TUPE transfer.
A recent ruling in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) gives clarity about when an employee is "assigned" to an employer before a TUPE transfer. In his latest TUPE update, Dr John McMullen explains the ruling's implications for employers.
David Malamatenios is a partner, Colin Makin, Sandra Martins and Krishna Santra are senior associates, and Hinal Raichura is a trainee at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
In Salmon v Castlebeck Care (Teesdale) Ltd (in administration) and another  IRLR 189 EAT, the EAT held that an employee who was dismissed for gross misconduct, but whose contractual appeal against dismissal was successful, did not need to be formally reinstated by her employer for her contract of employment to be resurrected so as to continue as if it had not been terminated.
Practical guidance on dismissals in the context of a TUPE transfer, including who has liability for dismissals; economic, technical and organisational reasons for dismissal; and information and consultation.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to TUPE.