header-logo header-logo

11 April 2019 / John McMullen
Issue: 7836 / Categories: Features , Employment , TUPE
printer mail-detail

How & why not all transfers are TUPE transfers

John McMullen navigates the Employment Rights Act to find a solution to complex transfers

  • ‘Successor’ employers and re-employment orders.
  • Transfers between associated employers.
  • A baffling question for employees.

Whenever employees are transferred from one employer to another, the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (TUPE) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/246) are the practitioner’s first port of call. However, not all cases of transfer of employment involve a TUPE transfer. In such cases the provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996), preserving statutory continuity of employment in certain instances of transfer of employment, may be an important consideration. These provisions apply irrespective of whether there is a TUPE transfer. In this article we discuss two recent cases in this area. The first concerns the power of employment tribunals to order re-engagement of an unfairly dismissed employee, either by the dismissing employer or by a successor of that employer, under ERA 1996, s 115(1). The key legal issue here is what exactly a ‘successor’ means. The second

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
back-to-top-scroll