Search

How can we help?

Icon

The importance of understanding the economic entity in a TUPE situation

For there to be a business transfer under TUPE there must be an ‘economic entity’ that retains its identity post-transfer.

To assess what amounts to an economic entity, the nature of the business activities needs to be understood.  In a labour-intensive business, such as cleaning, the transfer of the employees will be vital for TUPE to apply, however, for a business more heavily reliant on other assets such as land or equipment, the transfer of these will be the important factors.  This is always a question of fact for the Tribunal.

This point arose in the ECJ case of Securitas v ICTS Portugal.  In this case, Securitas took over security services from ICTS.  ICTS engaged security guards who were responsible for monitoring the entry and exit of persons and goods, by means of video surveillance devices. ICTS also provided them with uniforms and radio equipment.  Securitas took on the equipment involved in the work but refused to take on the employees and the question arose as to whether this prevented TUPE from applying.

In a labour-intensive business, such as cleaning, the transfer of the employees will be vital for TUPE to apply, however, for a business more heavily reliant on other assets such as land or equipment, the transfer of these will be the important factors.

The ECJ, deciding the point under Portugal’s Labour Code, reiterated the above principles and returned the case to the court to determine the matter on the facts.  It is worth noting, that one of the key questions for the ECJ in this case was whether the transfer of a service such as this could amount to a transfer of an undertaking, a point not in contention under English law by virtue of service provision changes being expressly covered under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006.

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

Pub
  • 09 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

The Arbitration Act 2025 – Factsheet

This factsheet outlines the major reforms and key developments introduced by the Arbitration Act 2025, including updates on summary disposal, jurisdictional challenges, emergency arbitrators, arbitrator disclosure duties, and governing law in arbitration proceedings.

art
  • 09 July 2026
  • Immigration

Right to Work Checks are changing from 1 October 2026: Is your business ready?

The Home Office’s new rules, effective 1 October 2026, will overhaul right to work checks and raise the risk of civil penalties for UK businesses.

art
  • 08 July 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

ICO prosecutes employee under the Data Protection Act for forwarding client data to his personal email address

The issue of employees taking confidential business information or personal data when moving to a new employer remains a significant concern for businesses.

Pub
  • 07 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Accelerating arbitration: Expedited procedures and key changes in the new ICC Rules – Episode 2

In episode 2, Jack Hobbs (Clarkslegal) and Christopher Howitt (Three Stone) explore how the latest expedited and highly expedited procedures under the ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 are transforming the landscape of dispute resolution.

art
  • 07 July 2026
  • Employment

6 month unfair dismissal rights: What employers need to know

Under the new Employment Rights Act 2025 the minimum period of service required to qualify to bring a statutory claim for unfair dismissal has been reduced from 2 full years to 6 months from 1 January 2027 onwards.  

art
  • 02 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Litigation and Artificial Intelligence: Where are we now?

In the recent case of Cork and another v Smith, the High Court publicly admonished a law firm and two of its solicitors after they had produced and submitted two AI-generated letters to the court containing misleading and false information in relation to a block transfer application made under Rule 12.37 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016.