Archive for the 'contracting out' Category

Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd and another v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd and another Butters and others (joint administrators of WW Realisation 8 Ltd and another) v BBC Worldwide Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd and another v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd and another
Butters and others (joint administrators of WW Realisation 8 Ltd and another) v BBC Worldwide Ltd and others [2009] EWCA Civ 1160; [2009] WLR (D) 322

“The anti-deprivation rule, which as a matter of public policy prevented parties from contracting out of the insolvency legislation by removing assets otherwise available for creditors, did not apply to complex contractual provisions by which investors were granted rights over assets derived from their own moneys, rights which were modified when an event of default happened, or to licence termination and share option provisions operative on insolvency which did not contravene the Insolvency Act 1986. The rule did not normally apply to a deprivation completed before the liquidation, bankruptcy or its equivalent occurred.”

WLR Daily, 10th November 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

De-Winter Heald and others v Brent London Borough Council – WLR Daily

De-Winter Heald and others v Brent London Borough Council [2009] EWCA Civ 930; [2009] WLR (D) 289

“Local housing authorities were entitled to contract out some or all of the reviews they were required to carry out under s 202 of the Housing Act 1996.”

WLR Daily, 4th September 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Metropolitan Resources Ltd v Churchill Dulwich Ltd (in liquidation) and another – WLR Daily

Metropolitan Resources Ltd v Churchill Dulwich Ltd (in liquidation) and another UKEAT/286/08; [2009] WLR (D) 217

“The introduction in the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 of the concept of a transfer of undertakings by ‘service provision change’ was intended to alleviate the difficulties created by the need in the 1981 Regulations to establish a transfer of a stable economic identity which retained its identity in the hands of the alleged transferee, by including in the definition of a transfer of an undertaking situations falling within reg 3(1)(b), outsourcing, in-sourcing and a change in the provision of services between contractors. The introduction of reg 3(1)(b) enabled a transfer to be established in any of the three situations if the activities previously carried out by client or contractor had ceased to be so carried out were instead carried out by the contractor or a new contractor or by the client.”

WLR Daily, 30th June 2009

Soource: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

EAT adopts ‘pragmatic’ approach to service provider TUPE transfers – OUT-LAW.com

“Employees have the same rights when a company changes service provider as when work is outsourced in the first place even if the new service is not identical to the old, the Employment Appeals Tribunal has ruled.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 29th June 2009

Source: www.out-law.com

Regina (Oriel Support Ltd) v Commissioners for Revenue and Customs – Times Law Reports

Regina (Oriel Support Ltd) v Commissioners for Revenue and Customs

Court of Appeal

“An outsourcing company responsible for calculating and paying the wages of workers employed by a labour provider to work for other businesses was not entitled to use its own employer reference when accounting for the tax on the workers’ wages because it was not the workers’ employer.”

The Times, 25th March 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Union takes outsourcing case to Employment Tribunal – OUT-LAW.com

“A £400 million outsourcing deal between local authorities and IBM was unfair because the full details of the transfer of staff to a private company were not revealed, workers’ union Unison has said.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 7th August 2008

Source: www.out-law.com


August 2017
M T W T F S S
« May    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Categories