Ms S Crawshay-Williams (Counsel) For the First v Herongrange Ltd — 2021

The tribunal heard a preliminary issue concerning whether there had been a relevant transfer under TUPE and whether the claimant was part of the organised grouping of employees that transferred. The claimant gave evidence and was cross-examined; the respondents called no evidence, relying instead on unsigned statements. The judge accepted the claimant's evidence that he had worked for the first respondent since 21 December 2009 as a Control Supervisor, alongside two other supervisors on a rota system monitoring CCTV for the first respondent's clients.

The tribunal considered an Asset Purchase Agreement dated 1 December 2019 between the first and second respondents. It found that the agreement transferred the business to the second respondent, including goodwill, the business name, and all assets listed in the agreement. The judge did not accept the respondents' suggestion that the first respondent retained a smaller-scale business activity, finding there was no evidence of retained assets, equipment, or post-agreement activity.

On the evidence, the tribunal found that the claimant was part of an organised grouping of employees carrying out the monitoring work and that his employment transferred to the second respondent under regulation 4 of TUPE. The tribunal also found that the claimant had not objected to transfer under regulation 7, and that the clause in the agreement stating that he would formally object had no foundation. The preliminary issue was therefore determined in the claimant's favour.