Popplewell J said: ‘We are however faced with what, at any rate, appear to be two conflicting Court of Appeal decisions. It is clear to us that ‘the time of transfer’ must be construed in the same way in relation to the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 as to the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981. Is the time of transfer ‘a moment in time’ or ‘a period of time.’ The Court of Appeal in Teesside Times Ltd. v Drury [1980] ICR 338 although obiter, plainly in the majority decision took the view that it could be over a period of time albeit per Goff LJ it might only be a short period so as to enable the transaction to be carried out. In our judgment we are bound by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Secretary of State for Employment v Spence [1986] ICR 651. It is plainly directly on point. Although Teesside was not cited, it postdates Teesside. The judgments in Teesside were obiter. The three Lords Justices were not speaking with one voice and accordingly we feel ourselves bound by the decision in Secretary of State for Employment v Spence.’
Judges:
Popplewell J
Citations:
[1988] IRLR 283, [1988] ICR 423
Statutes:
Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978
Citing:
Cited – Secretary of State for Employment v Spence CA 1986
The employers went into receivership in November 1983. A number of the employees were made redundant but the receiver hoped to carry on with the remaining workforce until February. However, a major customer threatened to withdraw its custom unless . .
Cited by:
Applied – Senior Heat Treatment Ltd v Bell and others EAT 20-Jun-1997
The employer appealed a finding as to the period of continuous employment of the claimants. Before a transfer of the undertaking to the employer, the former emloyer had paid redundancy payments to several employees, some whom in practice left to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.270315
