Meter U LTD v Hardy & Ors (Transfer of Undertakings : Economic technical or organisational reason) [2012] UKEAT 0207_11_2802 (28 February 2012)

Meter U LTD v Hardy & Ors (Transfer of Undertakings : Economic technical or organisational reason) [2012] UKEAT 0207_11_2802 (28 February 2012)

Franchisees are not part of the Respondent's workforce under TUPE; dismissals of transferred employees were for economic and organisational reasons entailing changes in the workforce and for redundancy; Employment Tribunals erred in including franchisees in the workforce; findings of automatic unfair dismissal set aside.

Citation
[2012] UKEAT 0207_11_2802
Parties
Respondent: Meter U Ltd; Claimants: Ms L Ackroyd & Others; Claimants: Mr M L Hardy & Others
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
28 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgments
Outcome
Appeals allowed; findings of automatic unfair dismissal set aside; cases remitted to Employment Tribunals.
Legal Topics
Transfer of Undertakings, Redundancy, Unfair Dismissal, Economic, Technical or Organisational Reason (eto), Franchise Arrangements
Employment Law Transfer of Undertakings Redundancy Unfair Dismissal Economic, Technical or Organisational Reason (eto) Franchise Arrangements

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Meter U Ltd

Respondent

Ms L Ackroyd & Others

Claimants

Mr M L Hardy & Others

Claimants

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 'workforce' in Regulation 7(2) of TUPE includes franchisees
  2. 2 Whether dismissals were for an ETO reason entailing changes in the workforce
  3. 3 Whether dismissals were for redundancy

Ratio Decidendi

Franchisees are not part of the Respondent's workforce under TUPE; dismissals of transferred employees were for economic and organisational reasons entailing changes in the workforce and for redundancy; Employment Tribunals erred in including franchisees in the workforce; findings of automatic unfair dismissal set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; findings of automatic unfair dismissal set aside; cases remitted to Employment Tribunals.

Orders

  • Ackroyd cases remitted for determination of fairness of dismissals under ERA section 98(4).
  • Hardy cases remitted for determination of whether franchise agreements were a sham and, if not, for determination of fairness of dismissals under ERA section 98(4).