Case 3304913/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Benjamin Udujie (counsel) For the First/Third v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3304913/2023
- Decision date
- 19 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr Benjamin Udujie (counsel) For the First/Third
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis preliminary hearing concerned whether the claimant's contract transferred under TUPE, the effective date of termination, and whether any complaints were out of time. The tribunal found Soda Folk Ltd was an organised grouping of resources pursuing the manufacture, sale and supply of soft drinks, outsourced across production, marketing, sales, accounts and distribution. It accepted that AP Drinks Ltd, later renamed Wellness Capital Ltd, acquired the AP assets under the asset sale agreement, had access to company records, marketed the brand from January 2023, and resumed production in July 2023 using the same manufacturer.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the business retained its identity and that the claimant was assigned to the transferred economic entity, so his contract transferred to AP Drinks Ltd/Wellness Capital Ltd on 19 January 2023. It rejected any TUPE transfer to Windfall Logistics Ltd, finding that its purchase of stock and some ingredients or packaging did not amount to a transfer of an economic entity, and dismissed the claims against that respondent. The tribunal also found the claimant's effective date of termination was 19 January 2023 because he had not been told before then that his employment had been terminated. By agreement, no time issues arose.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | Transfer found from Soda Folk Ltd to AP Drinks Ltd (now Wellness Capital Ltd) on 19 January 2023; claims against Windfall Logistics Ltd were dismissed because no transfer to it was found. Para 54 refers to 19 August 2023, but paras 35 and 66 identify 19 January 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Regulation 3(1)(a) TUPE
- Cheesman guidelines
- Spijkers test
- Regulation 4(1) TUPE
- Botzen 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.