Grace v Geo W King Ltd & Ors (Transfer of Undertakings : Service Provision Change) [2011] UKEAT 0023_11_2112 (21 December 2011)

Grace v Geo W King Ltd & Ors (Transfer of Undertakings : Service Provision Change) [2011] UKEAT 0023_11_2112 (21 December 2011)

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find, as a matter of fact, that the activities carried out by GWK consisted wholly or mainly of the supply of goods to IBC, rather than the provision of services. Therefore, the exclusion in TUPE 2006 reg. 3(3)(b) applied, and there was no service provision change transfer of employment to Premier or IBC.

Citation
[2011] UKEAT 0023_11_2112
Parties
Claimants: Mr H Pannu & Others; Claimants: Mr S Ahmed & Others & Unite; Claimant: Mr D Grace; Respondents: Geo W King (In Liquidation) & Others; Respondents: IBC and Premier
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
21 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Transfer of Undertakings, Service Provision Change, TUPE 2006, Supply of Goods Vs Services
Employment Law Transfer of Undertakings Service Provision Change TUPE 2006 Supply of Goods Vs Services

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr H Pannu & Others

Claimants

Mr S Ahmed & Others & Unite

Claimants

Mr D Grace

Claimant

Geo W King (In Liquidation) & Others

Respondents

IBC and Premier

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the activities consisted wholly or mainly of the supply of goods rather than services under TUPE 2006, reg. 3(3)(b), thereby excluding a service provision change (SPC) transfer.

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find, as a matter of fact, that the activities carried out by GWK consisted wholly or mainly of the supply of goods to IBC, rather than the provision of services. Therefore, the exclusion in TUPE 2006 reg. 3(3)(b) applied, and there was no service provision change transfer of employment to Premier or IBC.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed