header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
06 September 2024 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 8084 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals , TUPE
printer mail-detail

TUPE revisited in the Employment Appeal Tribunal

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
188096
Nicholas Dobson examines a recent EAT case, involving an NHS Integrated Care Board, in which TUPE made an appearance
  • Discusses Bicknell and another v NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Commissioning Board [2024] EAT 103.
  • Shows how commissioning is not an economic activity for the purposes of TUPE, where the commissioner does not provide the goods or services on the market itself.

The Transfer of Undertaking (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/246) (TUPE) was once ‘box office’. It was all over the legal press. There were conferences, government working parties and books on it. And if TUPE were a crime, I’d be guilty of all three. But in recent years, like a faded film or rock icon, TUPE’s star has faded, and it’s generally been able to get on quietly with its life. But on 25 June 2024, TUPE did make an appearance in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) before Sheldon J in Bicknell and another v NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Commissioning Board [2024] EAT

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

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
NLJ this week: Court of Appeals wrestles with Mazur fallout
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll