Johnson Controls Ltd v Campbell & Anor (Transfer of Undertakings : Service Provision Change) [2012] UKEAT 0041_12_1402 (14 February 2012)

Johnson Controls Ltd v Campbell & Anor (Transfer of Undertakings : Service Provision Change) [2012] UKEAT 0041_12_1402 (14 February 2012)

The Judge was entitled to find that the centralised, co-ordinated taxi administration service provided by Johnson Controls ceased to exist after the change; the service operated by UKAEA was not essentially the same activity, as centralisation and co-ordination were critical features that were lost.

Citation
[2012] UKEAT 0041_12_1402
Parties
Appellant: Johnson Controls; Second Respondent: United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA); Claimant: Mr Campbell
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
14 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Preliminary Issue Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Transfer of Undertakings, Service Provision Change, Unfair Dismissal, Redundancy Payment
Employment Law Transfer of Undertakings Service Provision Change Unfair Dismissal Redundancy Payment

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 1 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johnson Controls

Appellant

United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA)

Second Respondent

Mr Campbell

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Preliminary Issue Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a service provision change under TUPE when a centralised taxi booking administration service was taken in-house and no longer operated as a centralised service

Ratio Decidendi

The Judge was entitled to find that the centralised, co-ordinated taxi administration service provided by Johnson Controls ceased to exist after the change; the service operated by UKAEA was not essentially the same activity, as centralisation and co-ordination were critical features that were lost.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No TUPE transfer found
  • Cross-appeal not considered