header-logo header-logo

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

Safeguard or straitjacket?

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll