TUPE: employee was not re-assigned from an organised grouping despite third party instruction to remove (EAT) | Practical Law

TUPE: employee was not re-assigned from an organised grouping despite third party instruction to remove (EAT) | Practical Law

In Jakowlew v Nestor Primecare Services Ltd (t/a Saga Care) and another UKEAT/0431/14, the EAT considered whether, in the context of a TUPE service provision change, an instruction issued by a third party client to remove an employee from the provision of a service had the effect of re-assigning the employee away from the organised grouping.

TUPE: employee was not re-assigned from an organised grouping despite third party instruction to remove (EAT)

by Practical Law Employment
Published on 18 Jun 2015 • England, Scotland, Wales
In Jakowlew v Nestor Primecare Services Ltd (t/a Saga Care) and another UKEAT/0431/14, the EAT considered whether, in the context of a TUPE service provision change, an instruction issued by a third party client to remove an employee from the provision of a service had the effect of re-assigning the employee away from the organised grouping.