Edinburgh Home Link v Hart Appeal No. UKEATS/0061/11/BI
Published on: 03/08/2012
Issues Covered:
Transfer of Undertakings (TUPE)
Article Authors
The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Background
The first claimant was a director of, and had a contract of employment with, two organisations, HOP and HL. Both organisations provided services to homeless persons. The second claimant was a director of, and had a contract of employment, with HL only but has no connection with HC. The respondent was the Council who had arranged a series of annual service agreements with HL for the period 2005 to 2009.In 2009 the Council decided to take some services „in-house‟. A subsequent transfer ensued and TUPE was applied to the transfer. The claimant‟s contracts of employment were not transferred to the transferee and they initiated proceedings to the ET, claiming that they were necessarily assigned to the organised grouping of employees whose principal activity is the provision of the service for which a particular client has contracted. The claims were dismissed by the ET and so the claimants appealed.The EAT dismissed the appeal. For the first claimant, the EJ found it too difficult to differentiate the duties carried out for HL for HOP; both jobs were carried out contemporaneously so it would be difficult to demonstrate that regulation 4 of TUPE applied. It also could not be shown that the employees who had been transferred were actually now taking on the work and the roles that the claimants had previously fulfilled. The judge therefore concluded that the neither of the claimants in this case had been assigned. http://bit.ly/IPokf
Continue reading
We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.
Already a subscriber?
Please log in to view the full article.
What you'll get:
- Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
- Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
- 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
- Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team
Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial
Disclaimer
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.
This article is correct at 03/08/2012
Recent Case Law
Duployen v Whyte & Mackay Ltd [2025]
14/01/2025
McCahon v Chief Constable of the PSNI [2024]
16/12/2024
Q&A
How to handle it
Legal Island’s LMS, licensed to you
Imagine your staff having 24/7 access to a centralised training platform, tailored to your organisation’s brand and staff training needs, with unlimited users.
Learn more →
