Hidalgo and Others v Asociacion de Servicios Aser and Sociedad Cooperativa Minerva; Horst Ziemann v Ziemann Sicherheit GmbH and Horst Bohn Sicherheitsdienst: 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 a public body which has contracted out its home-help service for persons in need or awarded a contract for maintaining surveillance of some of its premises to a first undertaking decides, upon expiry of or after termination of that contract, to contract out the service or award the contract to a second undertaking, 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 service successively provided by the old and the new undertaking to which the service is contracted out or the contract is awarded is similar does not justify the conclusion that a transfer of such an entity has occurred.
C-173/96, C-247/96, [1999] IRLR 136, [1998] EUECJ C-173/96, [1998] EUECJ C-247/96
Bailii, Bailii
European
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: 23 August 2021; Ref: scu.161870