Aguebor v PCL Whitehall Security Group (Debarred), Kingdom Security Group Ltd (Contract of Employment: Implied Term/Variation/Construction of Term) [2015] UKEAT 0078_14_2707 (27 July 2015)

Aguebor v PCL Whitehall Security Group (Debarred), Kingdom Security Group Ltd (Contract of Employment: Implied Term/Variation/Construction of Term) [2015] UKEAT 0078_14_2707 (27 July 2015)

The Employment Judge erred in law by failing to recognize the significant contractual difference regarding entitlement to full-time work and by not addressing the transfer of undertaking gateway under TUPE. The matter must be remitted for proper findings on both issues.

Citation
[2015] UKEAT 0078_14_2707
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mr Uhun Aguebor; First Respondent: PCL Whitehall Security Group; Second Respondent: Kingdom Security Group Ltd (KSG)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
27 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing before a fresh Employment Judge.
Legal Topics
Constructive Unfair Dismissal, Transfer of Undertakings (protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (tupe), Contract Variation, Implied Terms
Employment Law Constructive Unfair Dismissal Transfer of Undertakings (protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (tupe) Contract Variation Implied Terms

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Uhun Aguebor

Appellant/claimant

PCL Whitehall Security Group

First Respondent

Kingdom Security Group Ltd (KSG)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Judge erred in law in concluding there was no significant difference between the Securicor contract (2000) and the PCL terms (2010) regarding entitlement to full-time work.
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Judge failed to address whether there was a transfer of an undertaking or part of an undertaking from PCL to Ward Security under Regulation 3(1)(a) of TUPE.

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Judge erred in law by failing to recognize the significant contractual difference regarding entitlement to full-time work and by not addressing the transfer of undertaking gateway under TUPE. The matter must be remitted for proper findings on both issues.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing before a fresh Employment Judge.

Orders

  • Remit both issues (constructive dismissal and TUPE transfer) for rehearing before a new Employment Judge.