W Dawood v Centrica plc: 3311515/2023
JUDGMENT
The Claim is struck out.REASONS
[1]The Claimant’s employment transferred to a subsidiary of the Respondent.[2]Then matters arose about which the Claimant was unhappy, which led to this claim being made.[3]On 23 September 2023 the Claimant and two others were again the subject of a transfer of an undertaking. The Claimant does not dispute this.[4]On 07 October 2023 the Claimant lodged his claim against the Respondent, only.[5]The Respondent and the Tribunal pointed out to the Claimant several times that the effect of the Transfer of Undertaking (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 is that all rights duties liabilities and obligations of a transferor pass to the transferee. This means that the Claimant could not claim against the Respondent. Before the claim was lodged the transfer of undertaking had occurred, and it should have been lodged against the transferee company. 10.7 Judgment with reasons – rule 62 Case No: 3311515/2023[6]The Respondent applied to have the against it struck out, for this reason.[7]That application was listed today for hearing. The Claimant knew of the date, as it was set at a hearing in September 2024 at which he was present.[8]The Claimant did not attend the hearing today. When telephoned by the clerk he said he was at a hospital for an appointment. When asked he said he had a letter giving him the appointment and that it was dated 31 July 2024. He had not asked for the hearing to be adjourned.[9]I decided to proceed with the hearing in these circumstances.[10]I decided to strike out the claim because the Claimant accepts that his employment transferred from the Respondent’s subsidiary company to a transferee company and so he can have no claim against the Respondent, as a transferor employer.