Ms D Innis v Allied Healthcare Group Ltd and 1 other — 2020

Mrs D Innis brought claims against Health Care Resourcing Group t/a Allied Health Services and SIPPI Homecare Ltd for unfair dismissal, unpaid wages, notice and holiday pay, and age discrimination. The hearing was directed to a preliminary TUPE issue to decide whether there had been a relevant transfer and, if so, which respondent was the proper respondent to each claim. The tribunal noted that R1 had provided care services in Brent and that Brent ended its contracts after a section 6 notice from the Care Quality Commission.

The tribunal found that Regulation 3 of TUPE was satisfied. It held that R1 had ceased carrying out the relevant activities as contractor on Brent's behalf and that those activities were carried out instead by subsequent contractors. R1's Wembley branch was an organised grouping of employees whose principal purpose was the provision of care services to Brent service users. Although the work was fragmented among seven providers and was allocated on postcode and capacity basis, the tribunal found that the activities after 10 January 2019 were fundamentally the same as those previously carried out by R1.

The tribunal accepted that R2 took on two service users from 6 December 2018 and a further 19 service users by 10 January 2019, and that the claimant cared for two service users who both transferred to R2. It rejected the argument that the contracts were merely spot purchases or that the arrangements were connected with a single specific event or task of short-term duration. The tribunal therefore held that the claimant's contract of employment transferred from R1 to R2 under TUPE after 10 January 2019.

As a consequence of that finding, the tribunal said the claimant had a potential remedy only against R2. After the oral judgment, R1 applied to be discharged from the proceedings and that application was granted.