McCarrick v Hunter

McCarrick v Hunter

The statutory language of TUPE 2006 regulation 3(1)(b) requires the same client throughout for a service provision change. The facts did not compel a finding of a transfer of an undertaking under regulation 3(1)(a) due to insufficient findings on relevant factors such as assets and the nature of the business. The appeal was dismissed as the statutory requirements for continuity of employment under TUPE were not met.

Parties
Appellant: Mr M McCarrick; Respondent: Mr C T Hunter
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Transfer of Undertakings, Service Provision Change, Continuity of Employment
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Transfer of Undertakings Service Provision Change Continuity of Employment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr M McCarrick

Appellant

Mr C T Hunter

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had sufficient continuity of employment to claim unfair dismissal under TUPE 2006
  2. 2 Whether there was a transfer of an undertaking or service provision under TUPE 2006

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory language of TUPE 2006 regulation 3(1)(b) requires the same client throughout for a service provision change. The facts did not compel a finding of a transfer of an undertaking under regulation 3(1)(a) due to insufficient findings on relevant factors such as assets and the nature of the business. The appeal was dismissed as the statutory requirements for continuity of employment under TUPE were not met.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed