In summary, Blinkbox was in danger of becoming insolvent and its shares were bought by Guvera who attempted to turn it around and at the same time keep around 20 of the 79 employees. The question for the ET was whether there had been a TUPE transfer which the ET ruled in the affirmative, concluding that Guvera had assumed day to day control of Blinkbox in a way that went beyond the mere exercise of ordinary supervision or information gathering between parent and subsidiary, and crossed the legal line identified by the Court of Appeal in Millam. Guvera appealed.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. The appeal was dismissed because: (1) the grounds of appeal for which leave had been granted were not pursued; and (2) the submissions actually advanced did not disclose any error of law on the part of the ET.