Case 2202260/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 2202260/2019
- Decision date
- 1 March 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brown Appearances
- Venue
- Central London
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims of unfair dismissal and race discrimination arising from events before a planned TUPE transfer. The respondent said the claimant's employment transferred to Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) on 1 March 2019 and that, under reg 4(2) of the TUPE Regulations 2006, the liabilities connected with the employment transferred to TCS so the tribunal had no jurisdiction against the respondent. The claimant accepted the transfer but said a compromise agreement with TCS allowed him to continue pursuing a grievance against the respondent.
The tribunal applied reg 4(2) TUPE, Allan v Stirling District Council and Fox Cross Claimants v Glasgow City Council; GMB Claimants v Same, together with the Rule 37(1) strike-out test for claims with no reasonable prospect of success. It noted that the regulations only preserved joint and several liability in limited statutory situations, such as certain consultation and personal injury claims, and that the claimant had not brought claims of that kind.
The tribunal found that the compromise agreement with TCS could not alter the effect of the TUPE Regulations. Because liability for the claimant's claims had transferred to TCS on 1 March 2019, and he had not brought a claim against TCS, the tribunal held there was no prospect of the respondent being liable. The unfair dismissal and race discrimination claims were therefore struck out.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out at a preliminary hearing under Rule 37(1) because the tribunal held that liability for the employment-related claim had transferred to TCS on 1 March 2019 under TUPE and there was no residual liability for the respondent. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Struck out at a preliminary hearing under Rule 37(1). The tribunal held that any liability arising from the claimant's race discrimination complaint had transferred to TCS on 1 March 2019 under TUPE, and that the compromise agreement with TCS could not change that position. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- Rule 37(1) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- no reasonable prospect of success
- Reg 4(2) TUPE Regulations 2006
- Allan v Stirling District Council
- Fox Cross Claimants v Glasgow City Council; GMB Claimants v Same
- Teeside Public Transport Company Limited (T/a Travel Dundee) v Riley
- Balls v Downham Market High School & College
- A v B
- North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Ezsias
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.