Pinnacle AIC Ltd v. Honeyman & Ors [2001] UKEAT 411_01_1909 (19 September 2001)

Pinnacle AIC Ltd v. Honeyman & Ors [2001] UKEAT 411_01_1909 (19 September 2001)

Permission is granted for appeal based on the need to review the Tribunal's decision in light of the Court of Appeal's reversal in Willer v ADI and the arguable absence of an economic entity transfer.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 411_01_1909
Parties
Appellant: Pinnacle; Second Respondent: Cape
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
19 September 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome
Permission granted for appeal; full hearing to be scheduled.
Legal Topics
Transfer of Undertakings, Economic Entity, Appeal Procedure
Employment Law Transfer of Undertakings Economic Entity Appeal Procedure

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pinnacle

Appellant

Cape

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a transfer of an economic entity under employment law
  2. 2 Whether only a contract was transferred and not the entity

Ratio Decidendi

Permission is granted for appeal based on the need to review the Tribunal's decision in light of the Court of Appeal's reversal in Willer v ADI and the arguable absence of an economic entity transfer.

Court Disposition

Permission granted for appeal; full hearing to be scheduled.

Orders

  • Skeleton arguments to be provided at least 14 days prior to hearing.
  • Photocopies of authorities to be submitted in three sets.