Case 2200814/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Worthington First v Appscatter Limited (in creditors’ liquidation) Second Respondent: Airnow Apps Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2200814/2023
- Decision date
- 15 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shukla
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Worthington First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Worthington First began work for Appscatter Limited on 1 January 2021 as a Data Partnerships Manager on a salary that rose to £55,000. On 15 November 2022, Philip Marcella emailed staff saying some employees and contractors would move to newly registered Airnow Apps Ltd and others would leave; shortly afterwards the claimant was dismissed with immediate effect. The tribunal found that products, employees and clients moved from the first respondent to the second respondent, and that the transfer occurred between 15 November 2022 and on or before 7 December 2022, before the first respondent's assets were under the supervision of insolvency practitioners.
On the breach of contract claim, the tribunal found that unpaid salary, commission, expenses, holiday pay, notice pay and pension contributions were due under the contract. It accepted that the claimant had recovered £2,239 from the Insolvency Service and deducted that sum from the £13,909 owed at the date of termination, leaving £11,670. The tribunal held that liability for that breach transferred to the second respondent under TUPE regulations 4 and 7 because there was a relevant transfer, the dismissal was transfer-related, the claimant would otherwise have been employed by the transferor and assigned to the transferred grouping, and regulation 8 did not apply.
On the regulation 13 complaint, the tribunal found the claimant was an affected employee and that the respondents had made no attempt to inform and consult representatives about the transfer. It described the breach as clear and serious and awarded the maximum compensation of 13 weeks' pay, calculated at the November 2022 weekly cap of £571, producing £7,423. The first and second respondents were held jointly and severally liable for that sum.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Damages were assessed on a gross basis after deducting £2,239 received from the Insolvency Service. The tribunal held that liability for the contract claim transferred to the second respondent under TUPE regulations 4 and 7. | Upheld | — | £11,670 |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | This was the regulation 13 complaint about failure to inform and consult affected employees. The tribunal awarded the maximum 13 weeks' pay under regulations 15(8) and 16(3), and held the first and second respondents jointly and severally liable under regulation 15(9). | Upheld | — | £7,423 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £19,093
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
7 references- TUPE reg 3 relevant transfer
- Cheesman multi-factorial approach
- Kavanagh v Coral Racing Ltd assignment approach
- Buchanan-Smith v Schleicher and Co International Ltd
- P Bork International A/S v Foreningen af Arbejdsledere i Danmark
- Society General, London Branch v Geys
- TUPE reg 16(3) just and equitable seriousness test
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.