Goshen Multiservice Limited v Accuro Environmental Limited — 2025

The claimant, having been awarded the 'housing' lot of a Luton Borough Council cleaning contract previously held by the respondent, brought a claim under Regulation 12 of the TUPE Regulations 2006 alleging that the respondent had breached Regulation 11 by providing inaccurate employment liability information (ELI). The dispute concerned two transferring employees whose terms and conditions consolidated work across the 'housing' and 'corporate' lots; the ELI gave their consolidated salary, hours and an average hourly rate, accompanied by a letter explaining the consolidated basis of the figures.

Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer held that Regulation 11 requires the transferor to provide the particulars of employment as required under s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996, and does not require the transferor to break down information into a form the transferee can simply lift into its own systems. The salary, hours and resulting average hourly rate were the contractual particulars and were accurately stated; the accompanying letter made the consolidated basis clear. There was therefore no breach of Regulation 11, and as a result no remedy could follow.

In the alternative, the judge noted that the contract price had been fixed before the ELI was shared, so no loss could be attributed to the ELI information. Any shortfall for the Cleaner in March 2024 would have been around £17 before the statutory living wage uplift in April 2024, and the total notional loss across both employees was estimated at around £570 (Cleaner) plus the Supervisor figure. The judge indicated that, had a technical breach been established, it would not have been just and equitable to award the £1,000 minimum, and a sum of around £250 to reflect the cost of a clarifying conversation would have been appropriate. The claim was dismissed.