In person For the First v Respondent — 2018

This was a preliminary hearing to decide whether the claimant was assigned to the organised grouping of resources or employees that transferred from the third respondent to the second respondent on or around 1 September 2018 under TUPE. The claimant had presented claims including unfair dismissal and a redundancy payment, and the tribunal noted that the age discrimination complaint related solely to the first respondent and was not the subject of this hearing.

The tribunal accepted that there had been a relevant transfer between the second and third respondents, but found that by no later than 20 July 2018 the claimant had been removed from the group working at London Road and that the third respondent would no longer have required him to work there. Relying on the May to August 2018 correspondence and meeting notes, the tribunal held that the claimant was not assigned immediately before the transfer. It applied regulation 4(1) and regulation 4(3) of TUPE, together with Robert Sage and Jakowlew, and concluded that the claimant's contract and related liabilities did not transfer to the second respondent.

Because the claimant had no reasonable prospect of establishing that his employment transferred to the second respondent, the tribunal struck out the claims against that respondent under Rule 37. The tribunal expressly left the fairness of any dismissal to the full merits hearing.