Cases1304554/2023

Claimant v Eurorad Limited

9 April 2024Before Employment Judge P BrittonMidlands Westremote video

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalnot determined

This was a preliminary hearing to determine whether the claimant had the necessary two years continuous employment to bring an unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found that continuity of employment was preserved under Section 218(6) ERA 1996 when the claimant transferred from associated employer Tile Mountain Limited to Eurorad Limited, meaning the claim can proceed.

Facts

The claimant began employment with Tile Mountain Limited on 28 May 2019. His employment with that company ended by mutual agreement on 31 October 2021, and he was employed by Eurorad Limited the next day, 01 November 2021. The respondent argued the claimant did not have two years continuous service for unfair dismissal purposes. Eurorad Limited and Tile Mountain Limited are associated employers within the meaning of Section 231 ERA 1996.

Decision

The tribunal held that the claimant had two years continuous employment at the date the claim was presented. Section 218(6) ERA 1996 preserved the claimant's continuity of employment when he transferred between the two associated employers. The unfair dismissal complaint can therefore proceed to a full hearing.

Practical note

Continuity of employment is preserved when an employee moves between associated employers, even when the first employment ends by mutual agreement and there is no formal TUPE transfer.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.231ERA 1996 s.218(6)

Case details

Case number
1304554/2023
Decision date
9 April 2024
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
other
Represented
No
Rep type
in house

Claimant representation

Represented
No
Rep type
lay rep