All your resources at your fingertips.Learn More
The EAT has held in Hunter v McCarrick that there will be no service provision change for the purposes of TUPE where the activities carried out by different contractors before and after the change are on behalf of different clients.
The claimant was employed by a provider of property services and the company that owned the properties became the subject of a winding-up petition. Law of Property Act receivers were employed by the lender on the properties and they assumed control of the properties and appointed a new property services company. The EAT held that there could be no service provision change when there was a change in contractors as well as a change of client.
"exceptional value for money in today's challenging legal environment" John Mitton, PG Legal