In Bateman and others v Asda Stores Ltd EAT/0221/09, the EAT held that the employer was entitled to change its employees' pay arrangements without their consent because it had reserved a clear contractual right to make unilateral variations to their terms and conditions of employment.
In Tapere v South London and Maudsley NHS Trust EAT/0410/08, the EAT held that, in requiring a transferred employee to move to a location outside the scope of the mobility clause in her original contract of employment with the transferor, the transferee had acted in fundamental breach of contract. The employee's subsequent resignation therefore amounted to a constructive dismissal. Further, the transferee's attempt to move her place of work amounted to a substantial change in her working conditions to her material detriment. She was, therefore, also entitled to be treated as having been dismissed under reg.4(9) of the TUPE Regulations.
In Jackson v Computershare Investor Services plc [2007] EWCA Civ 1065, the Court of Appeal ruled that the provision in the TUPE Regulations to the effect that a transferred contract of employment will have effect after the transfer as if originally made between the employee and the transferee could not be construed so as to give the employee a contractual benefit to which she had not been entitled under her original contract.
In Przybylska v Modus Telecom Ltd EAT/0566/06 the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that a tribunal was wrong to imply into a contract a term that the employer could carry out a review of the probationary period within a reasonable time of the expiry of the probationary period.
In Millam v The Print Factory (London) 1991 Ltd [2007] IRLR 526 CA, the Court of Appeal held that where the operation - as opposed to the ownership of a business - transferred to a new owner, TUPE applied notwithstanding that the business was acquired on a sale of shares.