Mr D White (First Claimant) Mr D Harper (Second Claimant) Mr J Farley (Third Claimant) Mr D Hickson (Fourth Claimant) Mr O Brammer (Fifth Claimant) v Westfield Shovels Limited (First Respondent) Associated British Ports (Second Respondent) Scanmech Plant (Sales and Service) Limited (Third Respondent) Heard: Remotely (by video link) — 2022

Westfield supplied plant services to ABP's Humber International Terminal until ABP terminated the arrangements with effect from 31 December 2020. Some Westfield employees transferred to ABP, but the five claimants did not. The tribunal considered whether there was a service provision change from Westfield to ABP and whether any transfer to Scanmech under TUPE occurred. Applying the TUPE authorities it cited, including Rynda, Amaryllis, Hunter, and Enterprise Management Services, it held that the relevant activities at HIT remained fundamentally the same, but the claimants were not immediately before 31 December 2020 an organised grouping with the principal purpose of carrying out those activities on ABP's behalf.

The tribunal found Westfield's maintenance function had been an organised grouping at earlier times, but its purpose had evolved by the date of transfer. It accepted that Mr White and Mr Hickson had largely moved into hydraulic work, that Mr Harper's role included broader management and support tasks, that Mr Farley's cleaning role was not integral to the ABP service, and that Mr Brammer's coal-related work had substantially reduced because coal volumes at Immingham had fallen. On that evidence, the tribunal held the claimants were not transferred to ABP or Scanmech under TUPE.

Because there was no transfer, the tribunal held that the claimants were dismissed by Westfield on 31 December 2020. It found the reason was redundancy rather than transfer, but that Westfield did not act reasonably in treating redundancy as sufficient because it did not adequately warn or consult, did not carry out any selection process, and took no reasonable steps to find suitable alternative employment. The unfair dismissal claims therefore succeeded, and the tribunal also upheld the claims for notice pay, accrued holiday pay, and statutory redundancy payments, with all monetary sums left to a later remedy hearing.