Hare Wines Ltd v Kaur and another [2019] EWCA Civ 216

Appeal against the EAT’s decision upholding the ET’s finding that the Claimant’s dismissal, in relation to a TUPE transfer, was automatically unfair. Appeal dismissed.

The Claimant, who had worked as a cashier in a wine wholesale business for over 10 years, was dismissed following a meeting on the day that the business was transferred to new ownership. At that meeting, it was alleged that the Claimant, who had had a strained working relationship with a colleague, did not want to transfer, so her employment ended. On the Claimant's claim of automatic unfair dismissal by reason of the TUPE transfer, the ET found that: the Claimant did not, in fact, object to transfer, and her contract of employment transferred to the new owner; the dismissal was automatically unfair; and the new owner had breached the contract of employment in respect of notice. The new owner's appeal to the EAT, on the grounds that the ET had wrongly concluded that the principal reason for the dismissal was the transfer, was dismissed.

The Court of Appeal held that the reason for the dismissal had been correctly identified as the TUPE transfer.


Published: 26/02/2019 16:35

Sign up for free email alerts

Email address
First name
Last name
Receive daily
Receive weekly
I agree to this site's terms and conditions