In the heart of Peterborough

TUPE troubling practitioners and the EAT

10 Mar 2017

In a service provision change, determining 'principle purpose' under reg. 3(3)(a)(i) TUPE has once again troubled practitioners as well as the EAT. In concentrating on the moment immediately before any transfer should account be taken of the activities actually being performed or should the original intention behind the grouping of employees trump that? The case arose in the healthcare sector. A group of employees had been formed to deliver personal care to a service user. Over time the level of care decreased so that not all employees were dedicated to deliver care to that service user; care was provided to other service users from within the group. The EAT concluded that the the original purpose of a grouping may change over time and therefore held that the ET had not misdirected itself by finding there had been no service provision change.

See the link below to HHJ Eady QC's judgment in Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust v (1) Harland and others (2) Danshell Healthcare Ltd.

Carl Fender