header-logo header-logo

A TUPE ace to bear in mind?

51261
In the light of a recent case, John McMullen highlights the potential use of TUPE, reg 4(9) in unfair dismissal claims
  • Lewis v Dow Silicones and the scope of reg 4(9) of TUPE.
  • The approach to applying ISS Facility Services NV in the UK via EU retained law.

In this article we examine Lewis v Dow Silicones UKEAT/0155/20/LA (V), which demonstrates that when an employee feels badly treated and resigns, claiming unfair dismissal, but fails because he has not shown a fundamental breach of contract on the part of the employer, he has another trick up his sleeve under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE). He may rely on reg 4(9) of TUPE which provides: ‘… where a relevant transfer involves or would involve a substantial change in working conditions to the material detriment of a person whose contract of employment is or would be transferred under paragraph (1), such an employee may treat the contract of employment as having

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll