Dismissed after 17 years because new operator refused to take her on: automatic unfair dismissal under TUPE
A petrol station employee with 17 years' service was automatically unfairly dismissed when the incoming operator refused to hire her. The tribunal awarded £29,242.10, with the transferee held solely liable.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- Mrs Perolls worked at a petrol station for 17 years.
- The business changed hands multiple times, with AKS Forcort Ltd taking over in April 2020.
- AKS decided to pull out and JNM Retail Ltd took over from 1 July 2020.
- Mrs Perolls was dismissed on 19 June 2020 because JNM refused to take her on.
- The dismissal was automatically unfair under TUPE regulations.
- JNM Retail Ltd was held solely liable for compensation.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Mrs Perolls began working at All Saints Service Station.
-
Tankerford Ltd bought station
Tankerford Ltd purchased the petrol station.
-
AKS Forcort Ltd took over
AKS Forcort Ltd took over running the station and became Mrs Perolls' employer.
-
Closure for refurbishment
Mrs Perolls was told the station would close for refurbishment.
-
Station closed
The station closed and Mrs Perolls stopped receiving pay.
-
Phone call about takeover
Mr Sithamparanathan told Mrs Perolls that 'Raju' would take over and asked for a reference.
-
Dismissal
Mrs Perolls met Mr Jeagatheshcumar who said he would use his own staff; she was effectively dismissed.
-
JNM Retail Ltd took over
JNM Retail Ltd signed a Retailers Agreement to run the station.
-
Meeting at home
Mr Sithamparanathan offered Mrs Perolls a job in Guildford, which she declined due to distance.
-
Claimed Job Seekers Allowance
Mrs Perolls began receiving Job Seekers Allowance.
-
Benefits ended
Mrs Perolls' entitlement to benefits ended; she stopped actively seeking work.
The legal issue
Whether the employee's dismissal was automatically unfair because the principal reason was a service provision change under TUPE, and whether liability for compensation passed to the new operator.
The outcome
The tribunal held that the employee was dismissed because of a relevant transfer, making her dismissal automatically unfair under regulation 7(1) of TUPE. The service provision change took effect on 1 July 2020, and the transferee inherited all contractual obligations.
Compensation:
- Basic award: £12,034.98
- Compensatory award: £9,811.46
- Unlawful deduction from wages: £1,694.20
- Breach of contract (notice pay): £4,691.64
- Holiday pay: £1,009.82
- Total: £29,242.10
Lessons & takeaways
- If you are dismissed because a new contractor refuses to take you on during a service provision change, your dismissal is likely automatically unfair under TUPE.
- The transferee (new employer) inherits all employment liabilities, including compensation for unfair dismissal, even if they did not employ the claimant.
- Length of service (here 17 years) can significantly increase the basic award.
- Keep records of all communications regarding the transfer and dismissal, as they are key evidence.
- Claimants can pursue multiple heads of claim, including unpaid wages, notice pay, and holiday pay, alongside unfair dismissal.
A familiar story with a clear legal outcome
This case illustrates how TUPE protections work in practice when a service contract changes hands. The employee had worked at the same petrol station for 17 years. When the operator changed twice in quick succession, the incoming operator refused to take her on, saying they would use their own staff. The tribunal had little difficulty finding that the dismissal was automatically unfair.
What the employer could have done differently
The outgoing operator could have ensured that the employee's contract transferred properly under TUPE. The incoming operator could have accepted the transfer as required by law. Instead, they left the employee without a job and facing a tribunal claim. The tribunal made clear that a service provision change had occurred, and the transferee was liable for all compensation.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a straightforward reminder that TUPE transfers are not optional for the incoming contractor. Refusing to take on existing staff because you 'have your own people' is a clear breach of the regulations. Employees in similar situations should seek legal advice promptly, as compensation can include not only unfair dismissal but also unpaid wages, notice pay, and holiday pay.
Similar cases
Employer admitted redundancy claim: £7,881 awarded after no defence
A former employee won £7,881 after their employer admitted the claim of unfair dismissal and related claims. The tribunal awarded redundancy pay, notice pay, and holiday pay.
Unfair dismissal after redundancy: employer in liquidation fails to defend claim
A former employee of Arnold Sanderson Limited has been awarded nearly £30,000 after the company dismissed him by reason of redundancy and failed to respond to his tribunal claim.
Redundancy without pay: former employee wins £4,918 after company fails to attend tribunal
A former employee of Maldon Brewing Company Ltd won £4,918.35 after the company dismissed him by reason of redundancy without paying his salary, notice pay, redundancy payment, or holiday pay. The respondent did not attend the hearing.
Brewery failed to pay salary for months before redundancy dismissal
A former employee was awarded over £22,800 after his employer stopped paying him from June 2021 and then dismissed him by reason of redundancy in November 2021 without paying notice or holiday pay.