Ward Hadaway Solicitors v Love & Ors [2010] UKEAT 0471_09_2503 (25 March 2010)

Ward Hadaway Solicitors v Love & Ors [2010] UKEAT 0471_09_2503 (25 March 2010)

The Tribunal's factual finding that only work in progress constituted activities under TUPE 2006, and that no activities ceased to be carried out by Ward Hadaway and transferred to Capsticks, was permissible and correct; expectation of future work does not constitute an activity for service provision change.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] UKEAT 0471_09_2503
Parties
Appellant: Ward Hadaway Solicitors; First Respondent: Nursing & Midwifery Council; Second Respondent: Capsticks LLP Solicitors; Claimant: Mrs Scott; Claimant: Mr Love
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
25 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
TUPE 2006, Service Provision Change, Unfair Dismissal
Employment Law TUPE 2006 Service Provision Change Unfair Dismissal

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ward Hadaway Solicitors

Appellant

Nursing & Midwifery Council

First Respondent

Capsticks LLP Solicitors

Second Respondent

Mrs Scott

Claimant

Mr Love

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a service provision change under TUPE 2006
  2. 2 Whether activities carried out by Ward Hadaway constituted a relevant transfer
  3. 3 Whether expectation of future work is an activity under TUPE

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's factual finding that only work in progress constituted activities under TUPE 2006, and that no activities ceased to be carried out by Ward Hadaway and transferred to Capsticks, was permissible and correct; expectation of future work does not constitute an activity for service provision change.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Permission to appeal refused