header-logo header-logo

Safeguard or straitjacket?

25 March 2011 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7458 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail
employment_4

Parliament should tread carefully when considering calls to reform TUPE regulations, say Chris Bryden & Michael Salter

Despite having been on the statute books since 1981, the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/246) continue to prove controversial. The Times in a recent leader (23 February 2011 “Terms and Conditions”) described them as “one of the chief obstacles to business in Britain” and as a “significant deterrent to competition”. It noted the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) decree that there is nothing in the Acquired Rights Directive (ARD) that required this country, when implementing it, to draft its regulations as tightly as TUPE is framed.

ARD v TUPE

An example of the extent of TUPE compared to the ARD, was provided in CLECE SA v Maria Socorro Martin Valor and Ayuntamiento de Cobisa (C-463/09), a referral from Spain to the ECJ, where the court held that a mere change in the provision of a service (here, the in-sourcing of a school cleaning contract) is not a relevant transfer

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll