- TUPE service provision change: activities must be 'fundamentally the same' (News, 12 October 2016)
- Impact of this case
- Relevant law
- Background facts and decision of employment tribunal
- Judgment of the EAT
‘Activities’ must be defined in a commonsense and pragmatic way when determining whether or not the activities which are no longer carried out by a contractor on behalf of the client and are now carried out by a subsequent contractor on behalf of the client are ‘fundamentally the same’, as required in order for there to be a TUPE service provision change (SPC). On the one hand, ‘activities’ should not be defined at such a level of generality that they do not really describe the specific activities at all. On the other hand, the definition should be holistic, having regard to the evidence in the round, avoiding too narrow a focus in deciding what the activities were. A pedantic and excessively detailed definition of 'activities' would risk defeating the purpose of the SPC provisions. EAT: The Salvation Army Trustee Company v Bahi and others.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial