C T Plus (Yorkshire) CIC v Stagecoach
The Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) held in this case that there was no service provision change (SPC) under the TUPE Regulations when a Council-tendered 'park and ride' service closed after a competitor set up at the site.
The Appellant bus company contracted with Hull City Council to provide a park-and-ride service, subsidised by the Council. Stagecoach set up on its own in competition, which led to the Council cancelling its contract with the Appellant from the day that the Stagecoach service started. An employment tribunal rejected the contention that there was an SPC and hence a TUPE transfer of staff to Stagecoach when the Appellant ceased operations.
The EAT agreed. The EAT urged a 'common sense and pragmatic' approach to the SPC regulations. Here, Stagecoach was carrying out a service as a commercial venture on its own behalf, not on behalf of the Council as a 'client', which is required for an SPC under the TUPE Regulations.
In Practice
"This was not a surprising decision and we question why it reached the level of the EAT in the first place. However, it further clarifies what is required for an SPC, in particular the narrow circumstances as to what a ‘client’ is under the TUPE Regulations," says Employment Associate Paul Burton.
At Frettens, all of our solicitors offer a free initial meeting or chat on the phone to answer your questions. If this article raises issues for you or your business, please call us on 01202 499255 and Kate or Paul will be happy to discuss it with you.
Comments