Claimant v Transvalair (UK) Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Preliminary hearing determined that no TUPE transfer occurred between first and second respondent. The substantive claims remain to be determined at a later date.
Facts
Eleven claimants worked for Transvalair (TVA), a haulage company providing dedicated delivery services to Victoria Plum Ltd (VP), an online bathroom retailer. When VP went into administration on 29 September 2023, it was acquired by AHK Designs in a pre-pack sale. TVA carried out deliveries on 30 September unaware of the administration, then sought to negotiate new terms with AHK. Negotiations failed and AHK engaged a different delivery company, Premier Deliveries. The claimants were laid off by TVA, who contended that the claimants' employment had transferred to AHK under TUPE.
Decision
The tribunal held there was no TUPE transfer under either Regulation 3(1)(a) or 3(1)(b). No assets, employees or contracts transferred from TVA to AHK. The tribunal applied McCarrick v Hunter, finding that service provision change provisions require the same client throughout, and AHK was a different legal entity to VP despite acquiring VP's business. AHK did not become TVA's client and should be dismissed from proceedings.
Practical note
A pre-pack administration sale does not automatically create a TUPE transfer for contractors providing services to the insolvent company; the service provision change rules require continuity of the same client, not merely similar business activities by a successor entity.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 4106848/2023
- Decision date
- 26 June 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Delivery drivers and associated staff
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No