header-logo header-logo

How & why not all transfers are TUPE transfers

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

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

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll