header-logo header-logo

18 September 2009 / John McMullen
Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Shifting staff

John McMullen sheds light on recent TUPE conundrums

A number of material cases have been decided in the UK on the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/246) (TUPE) which are of considerable interest, particularly those on the new service provision change rules under reg 3(1)(b) of TUPE.

The first case on the new rules on service provision change in reg 3(1)(b) was an employment tribunal decision in Hunt v Storm Communications Ltd, Wild Card Public Relations Ltd and Brown Brothers Wines (Europe) Ltd (Case No 2702546/2006). Storm Communications was a public relations service provider. Brown Brothers Wines (BBW) was its client.

In June 2006, BBW gave Storm notice that it was re-tendering for the provision of public relations services. Storm lost the pitch and the work went, on the re-tender with effect from 1 September 2006, to Wild Card. The claimant had an employment contract as account manager.

Her job description made no specific reference to any particular client, but she started working on the BBW account from the outset of her employment

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

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