-
- Date:
- 22 February 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the exemption from automatic employee transfer under reg.8(7) of TUPE cannot apply to a transfer from an administration.
-
- Date:
- 31 January 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Todd v Strain and others [2011] IRLR 11 EAT, the EAT held that the duty to give employee representatives information about a forthcoming transfer applies even where there are no measures being proposed that give rise to a duty to consult the representatives. Informing individual employees rather than representatives did not amount to compliance with the information requirements, but should have led the tribunal to award less than the maximum compensation of 13 weeks' pay.
-
- Date:
- 19 January 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Wood v Caledon Social Club Ltd and another EAT/0528/09, the EAT held that a TUPE transfer arose even though the business had temporarily ceased operating at the time of the transfer.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Ceri Hughes, David Parry, and Carly Mather, associates at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This week's case of the week, provided by Thomas Eggar LLP, covers constructive dismissal following a TUPE transfer.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This case is a good example of a key issue in TUPE claims: whether or not an employee was assigned to the transferred undertaking.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Helen Samuel, associate solicitor and Anna Bridges, associate solicitor, at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
-
- Date:
- 13 April 2010
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Parkwood Leisure Ltd v Alemo-Herron and others [2010] EWCA Civ 24 CA, the Court of Appeal held that, where the transfer of an undertaking occurs, and the transferring employees' contracts contain a clause referring to a collective agreement between the transferor and the relevant union, the transferee is not obliged to recognise wage increases agreed by the transferor and the union after the transfer has occurred resulting from negotiations to which the transferee was not a party.
-
- Date:
- 10 March 2010
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Unison v Somerset County Council and others EAT/0043/09, the EAT held that the employees "affected by" a TUPE transfer for the purposes of consultation with employee representatives were those who would or might be transferred, those whose job is jeopardised by the proposed transfer, and those with internal job applications pending. The definition did not extend to those who might in the future apply for a vacancy in the part of the undertaking transferred.
-
- Date:
- 13 January 2010
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Royal Mail Group Ltd v Communication Workers Union [2009] EWCA Civ 1045 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employer must inform representatives of employees who may be affected by a TUPE transfer of its considered and genuine view as to the legal implications of the proposed transfer. However, reg.13(2)(b) of the TUPE Regulations 2006 does not impose strict liability on the employer as to the accuracy of that information. Therefore the employer will not be in breach if the information that it gives reflects a genuine but mistaken belief as to the legal implications.