header-logo header-logo

31 March 2011 / David Tyme
Issue: 7459 / Categories: Features , Tribunals , Terms&conditions , Employment
printer mail-detail

Pre-packed TUPE

David Tyme provides a timely update on TUPE & pre-packed administrations

In OTG Limited and others v Barke and Others (EAT) [2011] UKEAT 0320/09/1602, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) considered five appeals listed together and determined that the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE) applied to pre-packed administrations. A pre-pack administration is where an insolvency practitioner becomes the administrator of a company experiencing financial difficulties and makes arrangements in advance of his appointment for the company to be sold immediately after his appointment. This circumvents the need to arrange a creditors meeting and also avoids any input from the court.

The relevant facts of each of the cases under appeal were as follows:

(i) The employer went into administration and on the same day, the entire business was sold as a going concern without any debts.  

(ii) The employer went into administration and the business was sold immediately as a going concern. Two days later the claimant was dismissed.  

(iii) The claimant was dismissed on grounds of redundancy with immediate effect and

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

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll