Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd Interserve Industrial Services Ltd v C Wilcox and 6 others A Seymour and 18 others I M Realisation Ltd (In Administration): EAT 2 Nov 2005

EAT Transfer of Undertakings: Consultation and Other Information; Transfer
Practice and Procedure: Appellate Jurisdiction
Nature of ‘undertaking’ for the purposes of TUPE: could there be a stable economic entity arising out of work done under contract where the contract could be terminated at will or others brought in to do the work in substitution?
Could there be a transfer of labour where equipment was needed to perform the tasks but that equipment was hired by the ‘transferor’?
Were the reasons given adequate in that the Employment Tribunal decided that the undertaking was labour intensive yet that most of the workforce continued to work for the transferor?

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Langstaff

Citations:

UKEAT/0218/05, [2005] UKEAT 0218 – 05 – 0211, [2006] IRLR 258

Links:

Bailii, EAT, EAT

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromBalfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd and Another v Wilcox and others CA 20-Jul-2006
Rule 30(6) of the 2004 Rules, which requires sufficient reasons, is intended to be a guide and not a straitjacket so that if it can be reasonably spelled out from a determination that what the rule requires has been provided by the Tribunal, then no . .
CitedGreenwood v NWF Retail Ltd EAT 18-Feb-2011
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke
An Employment Tribunal decision must comply in both form and substance with 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules . .
CitedSivagnansundarum v Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust EAT 28-Jun-2011
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke
Although this was a ‘narrative’ judgment sufficient substance could be extracted from the decision to demonstrate compliance with rule . .
CitedJoes v The City and County of Swansea EAT 5-May-2011
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Compensation
The decisions to apportion compensation, not to award any future loss after April 2008 and to apply an ‘uplift’ of 25% in respect of breach of statutory procedures were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237427