Wren & Ors v Eastbourne Borough Council & Anor [1993] UKEAT 386_92_2705 (27 May 1993)

Wren & Ors v Eastbourne Borough Council & Anor [1993] UKEAT 386_92_2705 (27 May 1993)

The Industrial Tribunal erred by failing to identify the undertaking capable of transfer and by not applying the correct legal principles from recent European Court of Justice cases; the question of whether there was a transfer of an undertaking and whether the activities were a commercial venture are issues of fact for the Tribunal to determine on reconsideration.

Citation
[1993] UKEAT 386_92_2705
Parties
Appellants: Mr Adams and 17 others; First Respondent: Eastbourne Borough Council; Second Respondent: UK Waste Control Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
27 May 1993
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted for reconsideration by an Industrial Tribunal.
Legal Topics
Transfer of Undertakings, Unfair Dismissal, Redundancy, Interpretation of Directives, Commercial Venture Exception
Employment Law Labour Law European Union Law Transfer of Undertakings Unfair Dismissal Redundancy Interpretation of Directives Commercial Venture Exception

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Adams and 17 others

Appellants

Eastbourne Borough Council

First Respondent

UK Waste Control Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a transfer of an undertaking under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981
  2. 2 Whether the activities were 'in the nature of a commercial venture' under Regulation 2(2)
  3. 3 Whether the dismissals were unfair under the Regulations

Ratio Decidendi

The Industrial Tribunal erred by failing to identify the undertaking capable of transfer and by not applying the correct legal principles from recent European Court of Justice cases; the question of whether there was a transfer of an undertaking and whether the activities were a commercial venture are issues of fact for the Tribunal to determine on reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted for reconsideration by an Industrial Tribunal.

Orders

  • Mr Adams' appeal adjourned sine die with liberty to apply.
  • Case remitted to Industrial Tribunal for reconsideration.