header-logo header-logo

31 March 2011 / David Tyme
Issue: 7459 / Categories: Features , Tribunals , Terms&conditions , Employment
printer mail-detail

Pre-packed TUPE

David Tyme provides a timely update on TUPE & pre-packed administrations

In OTG Limited and others v Barke and Others (EAT) [2011] UKEAT 0320/09/1602, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) considered five appeals listed together and determined that the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE) applied to pre-packed administrations. A pre-pack administration is where an insolvency practitioner becomes the administrator of a company experiencing financial difficulties and makes arrangements in advance of his appointment for the company to be sold immediately after his appointment. This circumvents the need to arrange a creditors meeting and also avoids any input from the court.

The relevant facts of each of the cases under appeal were as follows:

(i) The employer went into administration and on the same day, the entire business was sold as a going concern without any debts.  

(ii) The employer went into administration and the business was sold immediately as a going concern. Two days later the claimant was dismissed.  

(iii) The claimant was dismissed on grounds of redundancy with immediate effect and

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