header-logo header-logo

The transfer window

02 June 2017 / John McMullen
Issue: 7748 / Categories: Features , TUPE , Employment
printer mail-detail
nlj_7748_mcmullen

John McMullen covers the recent developments relating to TUPE

  • Service provision change: the ‘principal purpose’ of an ‘organised grouping of employees’.
  • The interface between redundancy & TUPE.
  • The consequences of providing incorrect employee liability information.

A trio of cases from the Employment Appeal Tribunal highlights a number of topical issues in the interpretation of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/246) (TUPE).

Service provision change

In order for there to be a service provision change TUPE transfer within the meaning of TUPE, reg 3(1)(b), there must be, by virtue of reg 3(3)(a)(i), prior to the change of provider, an organised grouping of employees, the principal purpose of which is to carry out the activities concerned on behalf of the client. The correct approach to be adopted to the determination of ‘principal purpose’ was the issue in Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust v Harland UK EAT/0173/16/DM.

In this case the claimant employees were employed by the Trust as part of an organised grouping of employees

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll