Search

How can we help?

Icon

Temporary cessation of work and lay off of employees did not preclude TUPE from applying

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has  found that an employment tribunal was wrong in finding that TUPE did not apply where there had been a lay-off of employees as a result of a commercial dispute with the main contractor leading to termination of the contract before the new contractor took on the services (Mustafa v Trek Highways Services Ltd and others UKEAT/0064/15).

In this case, Transport for London (Tfl) contracted with the main contractor to carry out road maintenance services who then subcontracted traffic management services to Trek Highways Services Ltd (Trek).  On re-tender, Tfl decided to award the work to a new provider who would take over the services on 1st April 2013.   The Claimants were due to transfer to the new provider under TUPE.  However, before this date, the main contractor and Trek had a dispute which led to Trek suspending operations on 8th March 2013 and asking staff to go home and wait to be contacted.  On 20thMarch 2013, the commercial contract came to an end by agreement and shortly afterwards Trek went into administration.

The main contractor continued to be obliged to provide traffic management services and continued to do so by alternative, ad hoc means pending the services being taken on.

Chambers and Partners

The Clarkslegal team are commercial and good to work with. They get what our business needs and tell me what I need to hear.

The employment tribunal found that there had been no business transfer or service provision change under TUPE given the commercial sub contract had been terminated before the new contract was due to commence. The EAT, however, disagreed stating that the suspension of work did not mean that the entity had ceased to exist.  There were still staff, vehicles, and equipment dedicated to the work and the sub-contract remained in existence.  Further, in relation to a service provision change under TUPE, it held that the wording of TUPE did not require the organised grouping of employees to be actively engaging in the activity immediately before the transfer and there was nothing in TUPE to suggest that a temporary cessation of activities would preclude there from being an organised grouping.

The case has been remitted to the employment tribunal to reconsider the application of TUPE. It confirms that simply because an outgoing contractor may not actually be performing the services in question at the time of the putative transfer, this does not, in itself, prevent there being a TUPE transfer. In particular, the EAT made clear that the reasons why the activities cease to be carried out (in this case, a commercial dispute) will usually be irrelevant to the application of TUPE.

About this article

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.

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 08 September 2017
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Victim of fraud? How to identify the perpetrator

Every day companies and individuals lose money to fraudsters, who hack into email accounts and alter emails sent from companies to their customers, or send sophisticated phishing emails from fake domain names designed to dupe customers into believing they are from a trusted supplier.

art
  • 07 September 2017
  • Brexit

Leaked document on Post Brexit Immigration

The Guardian has obtained a copy of a leaked document setting out the government’s proposals on post-Brexit immigration.

art
  • 05 September 2017
  • Construction

How to avoid construction payment disputes

Payment disputes continue to be one of the most common problems in the construction industry, and we have published numerous articles on the key court decisions that affect the interpretation of payment provisions

art
  • 05 September 2017
  • Construction

Payment in Construction Contracts – What’s new?

Payment provisions are an industry “hot topic” and the wave of litigation since the 2009 amendments to the Construction Act remains relevant. If you would like a reminder of the principles to follow when applying for or making payment, then see our previous articles here and here.

art
  • 04 September 2017
  • Employment

Tribunal fees: should you prepare for a deluge of claims and what happens next?

It has been a tumultuous few years for the Conservative party and the recent Supreme Court ruling has added to the party’s list of woes. The government will now have to repay £32m to parties following the Court’s unanimous decision that the tribunal fee regime was unlawful.

art
  • 31 August 2017
  • Corporate and M&A

Directors’ & Officers’ Liability Insurance

We are often asked by directors (both exec and non-exec) of clients about whether their company should have D & O liability insurance in place, and what it does and does not cover.