Celtec Ltd v. Astley & Ors [2001] UKEAT 293_00_0510 (5 October 2001)

Celtec Ltd v. Astley & Ors [2001] UKEAT 293_00_0510 (5 October 2001)

The transfer of the undertaking was a process spanning several years, not a single event. Each time a secondee became directly employed by the TEC constituted a transaction within the transfer period. Respondents were employed by the transferor immediately before their respective transactions, so continuity of employment was preserved under section 218, TUPE, and the Directive.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 293_00_0510
Parties
Appellant: Celtec Limited; Respondent: John Astley; Respondent: Julie Owens; Respondent: Deborah Hawkes
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
05 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Continuity of Employment, Transfer of Undertakings, TUPE, Acquired Rights Directive, Redundancy Rights
Employment Law Labour Law European Law Continuity of Employment Transfer of Undertakings TUPE Acquired Rights Directive Redundancy Rights

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Celtec Limited

Appellant

John Astley

Respondent

Julie Owens

Respondent

Deborah Hawkes

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents had continuity of employment from civil service to TEC employment under section 218 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and TUPE.
  2. 2 When did the transfer of undertaking occur for purposes of continuity of employment?
  3. 3 What constitutes the undertaking transferred under TUPE and the Directive?

Ratio Decidendi

The transfer of the undertaking was a process spanning several years, not a single event. Each time a secondee became directly employed by the TEC constituted a transaction within the transfer period. Respondents were employed by the transferor immediately before their respective transactions, so continuity of employment was preserved under section 218, TUPE, and the Directive.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Continuity of employment preserved for respondents from civil service to TEC employment.
  • Employment Tribunal's decision affirmed.