Mr Gary Scott v Holt Leisure Parks Limited — 2020

Mr Scott worked as a night watchman for Holt Leisure Parks Limited from 6 June 2014 until 12 February 2020. After a night watchman died in early January 2020, the first respondent decided to outsource night security at Inverkip to Mr Kenny Knox. The tribunal found that the night security work carried out by the claimant and the other night watchmen formed an organised grouping whose principal purpose was to carry out that activity, and that the activities carried out by the second respondent were fundamentally the same. It therefore held that there had been a relevant transfer by way of a service provision change under Regulation 3(1)(b) of the TUPE Regulations 2006, and that the claimant's contract transferred automatically to the second respondent under Regulation 4(1).

The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence as credible and was not persuaded by the first respondent's account that there had been a discussion with him before 12 February 2020 about the transfer. It found that the claimant was told the second respondent was willing to "take him on", but that this did not amount to a transfer being avoided or to a valid objection under the TUPE Regulations. The tribunal recorded that, because the employment had transferred, it did not have to consider the second issue as framed, although the formal judgment states that the claimant was not unfairly dismissed by the first respondent.

On the Regulation 13 complaint, the tribunal found that the first respondent had not properly informed and consulted affected employees. It rejected reliance on the micro-business exemption in Regulation 13A, found no special circumstances under Regulation 15(2), and held that the information given to the claimant on 12 February 2020 did not satisfy the statutory requirements. Having regard to the limited information provided and the absence of mitigating circumstances, the tribunal awarded compensation equivalent to 13 weeks' pay. Using the claimant's average fortnightly pay of £300, it calculated the award at £1,950, payable jointly and severally by the first and second respondents.