Francisco Hernandez Vidal SA v Perez, and Contratas y Limpiezas SL; Gomez Montana v Claro Sol SA and Red Nacional de Ferrocarriles Espanoles (Renfe): ECJ 10 Dec 1998

Europa Article 1(1) of Directive 77/187 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses is to be interpreted as meaning that the Directive applies to a situation in which an undertaking which used to entrust the cleaning of its premises to another undertaking decides to terminate its contract with that other undertaking and in future to carry out the cleaning work itself, provided that the operation is accompanied by the transfer of an economic entity between the two undertakings. The term `economic entity’ refers to an organised grouping of persons and assets enabling an economic activity which pursues a specific objective to be exercised. The mere fact that the maintenance work carried out first by the cleaning firm and then by the undertaking owning the premises is similar does not justify the conclusion that a transfer of such an entity has occurred.


C-127/96, [1999] IRLR 132, C-229/96, C-74/97, [1998] EUECJ C-127/96, [1998] EUECJ C-229/96, [1998] EUECJ C-74/97


Bailii, Bailii, Bailii



Cited by:

CitedFairhurst Ward Abbotts Limited v Botes Building Limited and others CA 13-Feb-2004
A claim was made under the TUPE regulations. The company replied that the part of the business transferred was not a discrete economic entity.
Held: The regulations did not require that in order to be governed by the regulations, a business . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161835