Relevant transfer

Case 3: The facts

This case was brought by teachers on a podiatry degree course offered jointly by Camden Primary Care Trust and University College London; all were employed by one or other of those two organisations.

When the degree programme was transferred to the University of East London, the teachers objected to the transfer. The first issue to be decided was whether the transfer of the degree programme was a relevant transfer for the purposes of TUPE.

The ruling

The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that there had been a relevant transfer. In such decisions, a number of factors must be taken into account, including whether assets and customers have transferred and the degree of similarity between the activity carried out before and after the transfer.

In this case, the "customers" were the students, all of whom had transferred (along with the funding). The "nature of the activity" was the provision of a podiatry degree; although there were some differences in the way this education service was provided, it was still the same service so there was a relevant transfer.

Camden Primary Care Trust and University College v Skittrall and others UKEAT/0078/05