Celtec Ltd v Astley
A transfer of an undertaking takes place at a particular point in time, rather than over a period, and is the date on which responsibility for running the business moves from the transferor to the transferee.
Facts
Mr Astley and other civil servants were seconded to a newly formed training and enterprise council, which took over functions previously carried out by a government department. Several years later, they resigned from the civil service and became employees of the council. The question arose whether their continuity of employment was preserved, which depended on whether there had been a transfer of an undertaking, and when it had taken place.
Legal principle
The House of Lords, following a reference to the Court of Justice, held that the date of a transfer is the point in time at which the responsibility as employer for carrying on the business of the unit transferred moves from the transferor to the transferee, and that a transfer cannot be spread over a period of time. The employees who were seconded at the time of the transfer were treated as having been transferred at that date, so their contracts passed to the council at that time, and their continuity of employment was preserved.
Related cases on redundancy and transfer of undertakings
- Botzen v Rotterdamsche Droogdok Maatschappij BV Case 186/83, [1985] ECR 519
- Cheesman v R Brewer Contracts Ltd [2001] IRLR 144
- High Table Ltd v Horst [1998] ICR 409
- ISS Facility Services NV v Govaerts Case C-344/18, EU:C:2020:239
- Litster v Forth Dry Dock & Engineering Co Ltd [1990] 1 AC 546
- Metropolitan Resources Ltd v Churchill Dulwich Ltd [2009] ICR 1380
- Murray v Foyle Meats Ltd [1999] UKHL 30, [2000] 1 AC 51
- Safeway Stores plc v Burrell [1997] ICR 523
Studying employment law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
