header-logo header-logo

01 May 2008 / Kate Edwards
Issue: 7319 / Categories: Features , Terms&conditions , TUPE , Employment
printer mail-detail

The power to Improve

Kate Edwards discusses how employee rights can be enhanced after a TUPE transfer

Regent Security Services Limited v Power [2007] EWCA Civ 118, [2007] All ER (D) 298 (Nov) concerned the interpretation of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981 (TUPE), but has wide implications for how the rights and obligations of employees and employers upon a TUPE transfer taking place are to be construed. In particular, the decision makes clear that upon transfer an employee not only retains pre-transfer rights, but may acquire additional rights by agreement with the transferee employer. Where such additional rights are acquired, eg by consensual contractual variation, the employee thereafter has a choice of whether to rely upon the old pre-transfer contract, or new (varied) version. The decision thus represents a pro-employee stance in which the EC Acquired Rights Directive 1977/1877 (the Directive) is construed so as to give maximum choice and maximum benefit to employees who transfer under the TUPE Regulations. The transferee employer, however, may be left with an unpredictable burden.

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll