Grace v. Youth Development & Adventure Project & Anor, Court of Appeal - United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal, January 30, 2003, [2003] UKEAT 0034_02_3001

Resolution Date:January 30, 2003
Issuing Organization:United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
Actores:Grace v. Youth Development & Adventure Project & Anor
 
FREE EXCERPT

Appeal No. EATS/0034/02

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL

52 MELVILLE STREET, EDINBURGH EH3 7HF

At the Tribunal

On 30 January 2003

Before

THE HONOURABLE LORD JOHNSTON

MR A J RAMSDEN

MR M G SMITH

Ms CATHERINE GRACE APPELLANT

(1) YOUTH DEVELOPMENT & ADVENTURE PROJECT

(2) THE NORTH AYRSHIRE PARTNERSHIP RESPONDENTS

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

APPEARANCES

LORD JOHNSTON:

1. This appeal, at the instance of the employee, arises in rather unusual circumstances.

2. For some time prior to March 1999 the appellant was employed by the first respondents. They were a freestanding organisation, funded by central Government, concerned with youth projects generally. They had assets which comprised, computers, printers, photocopier, video printing material, art materials, canoes, wetsuits, ropes and office furniture. They also acquired a licence for outdoor activities from the Adventure Activities Licensing Authority. By definition, they also had employees.

3. The facts disclose that the operation to the first respondents came to an end some time in 1998 when the Government withdrew the relevant funding. The second respondents were established in, or about, the beginning of 1997 for the purpose of making a plant for North Ayr and to determine strategy for youth involvement. They were funded by the Scottish Office which remitted funds to the local authority, in this case, South Ayrshire Council.

4. It appears that at the time of the determination of the first respondents' activities, the appellant was dismissed following investigation into financial irregularities. This issue is only live therefore in respect of the subsequent, if any, transfer of the activities of the first respondents by reason of an apparent claim for unfair dismissal being pursued by the appellant. The question is, against whom should it be directed.

5. The determination of the Tribunal, Chairman sitting alone, on the preliminary issue of whether there had been a transfer of undertaking, was that the activities of the first respondents which were accepted by both parties to be an undertaking within the meaning of the relevant regulations have been transferred to South Ayrshire Council and not to the second respondents. The application was accordingly dismissed and it is against that decision this appeal is taken.

6. In a very well presented debate the issues were narrowed, it being accepted by both parties that prior to its determination, the first respondents' activities...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL