header-logo header-logo

17 October 2019 / Shane Crawford
Issue: 7860 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

Non-trivial pursuit

9451
Shane Crawford discusses pursuing a claim against the employer during a statutory moratorium, under the Insolvency Act 1986

The existence of the moratorium on litigation against a company in administration presents a significant impediment to many employees seeking to enforce employment rights. The recent case of Ince Gordon Dadds LLP and ors v Tunstall and ors UKEAT/0141/19/JOJ (Tunstall) considers the extent of the moratorium and in particular demonstrates that if claims are sought against individuals, not simply the company, the moratorium does not extend to those individuals. Moreover, if TUPE applies the transferee does not benefit from the bar on litigation against the insolvent employer.

The claim

Tunstall sought to claim unfair dismissal and discrimination claims in addition to automatic unfair dismissal under TUPE. She had named the partners of the LLP employer as individual respondents as well as the new company acquiring the business under TUPE.

The facts

Tunstall was a solicitor who worked for the first and subsequently second respondent employer who had gone into administration. The third, fourth,

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll