The Court of Appeal’s decision in Hare Wines Ltd v Kaur highlights that employers cannot pick and choose who transfers when a business transfer is governed by TUPE 2006. Under Reg 7(1) TUPE 2006, a dismissal is automatically unfair where the sole or principal reason for the dismissal is the transfer itself. K and C worked for H&W and there was friction and difficulty in their working relationship. The business transferred to Hare Wines Ltd (HW Ltd) and K was dismissed. The CA agreed with the ET and EAT that the reason for dismissal was the transfer and thereby automatically unfair. This was because: (a) K was dismissed on the day of the transfer; (b) the poor working relationship pre-transfer at H&W had persisted for some time but there was no evidence suggesting it was cause for dismissal during K’s employment at H&W; (c) HW Ltd anticipated that there would be ongoing difficulties in the working relationship, so did not want K ‘on the books’; and, (d) HW Ltd therefore decided that it did not wish K’s contract of employment to transfer and communicated that wish to H&W.

The updates are kindly provided by Simons Muirhead & Burton Law firm

This update provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and help judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links to access full details. If no link is provided, contact us for more information.  Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.