Dismissed after a TUPE transfer: fish and chip shop manager awarded £7,828
A manager and fryer at a fish and chip shop was automatically unfairly dismissed after her employment transferred to a new owner, who told her there was no work. The Watford tribunal awarded £7,828 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a manager and fryer at Boundary Plaice fish and chip shop from 2 February 2015.
- The business was sold to the second respondent on 28 February 2019, constituting a TUPE transfer.
- The claimant was off sick from 21 January 2019 and provided sick notes to both respondents.
- The second respondent dismissed the claimant on 9 May 2019 by telling her there was no work for her.
- The dismissal was automatically unfair because the sole reason was the transfer.
- The claimant mitigated her loss by obtaining a better-paying job in January 2020.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working at Boundary Plaice fish and chip shop as manager and fryer.
-
Sickness absence began
Claimant went off sick with swelling of the temporal artery and provided sick notes.
-
Business transfer
Boundary Plaice was sold to the second respondent; claimant's employment transferred under TUPE.
-
Deemed dismissal
Tribunal found claimant was dismissed by the second respondent on this date due to failure to pay SSP.
-
Express dismissal
Claimant was told there was no job for her when she tried to return to work.
-
Last sick note expired
Claimant's final sick note expired; she had been receiving SSP until 2 March 2019.
-
New job started
Claimant started a better-paying job at Golden Years Catering, ending her loss.
-
Merits hearing
Tribunal found unfair dismissal and other claims succeeded against second respondent.
-
Remedy hearing
Tribunal awarded compensation for unfair dismissal, SSP, and holiday pay.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's employment transferred under TUPE to the new owner, and if so, whether the dismissal was automatically unfair because the reason was the transfer itself.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the claimant's employment transferred to the second respondent under TUPE when the business was sold on 28 February 2019. The dismissal on 9 May 2019 was automatically unfair because the sole reason was the transfer.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £1,500.00
- Compensatory award: £5,712.05 (reduced by 30% for Polkey to reflect chance of dismissal anyway)
- Total: £7,828.65
Lessons & takeaways
- If your employer sells the business, your employment usually transfers to the new owner under TUPE – they cannot simply dismiss you because of the transfer.
- A dismissal that is solely because of a TUPE transfer is automatically unfair, regardless of length of service.
- Keep records of sick notes and pay – they are crucial evidence if you need to claim unpaid SSP or holiday pay after a transfer.
- If you are dismissed after a transfer, you may be able to claim unfair dismissal even if you have less than two years' service.
When a business changes hands, employees' rights don't disappear
This case shows what can happen when a new owner takes over a business and fails to understand their obligations under TUPE. The claimant, a manager and fryer at a fish and chip shop, had been off sick with a temporal artery condition when the shop was sold. The new owner, Best British Fish Ltd, stopped paying her statutory sick pay and later told her there was no work for her when she tried to return.
The tribunal found that the claimant's employment had transferred to the new owner under TUPE, meaning they inherited all rights and liabilities – including the duty to pay sick pay and holiday pay. By dismissing her because of the transfer, the new owner committed an automatically unfair dismissal. The tribunal also noted that the claimant had mitigated her loss by finding a better-paid job within a year.
What the employer could have done differently
The new owner could have avoided liability by honouring the claimant's existing terms, continuing SSP, and engaging with her about her return to work. Instead, they simply told her there was no job – a clear breach of TUPE. The fact that the claimant had four years' service and a strong sick note record made the dismissal particularly difficult to defend.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that TUPE transfers do not give new owners a free pass to dismiss staff. Any dismissal that is solely because of the transfer is automatically unfair, and employees can claim compensation even if they have less than two years' service. The Polkey reduction of 30% here shows that tribunals may still reduce compensation if there was a chance the employee would have been dismissed anyway – but the core protection remains strong.
Similar cases
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.
Automatic unfair dismissal after TUPE transfer: bus driver awarded £50,000
A transport worker was automatically unfairly dismissed when her employer failed to assign her to the correct transferring group under TUPE. The tribunal awarded £50,441.99 including a 20% ACAS uplift.
Unfair dismissal but 100% Polkey reduction due to workplace closure
A former employee was unfairly dismissed but received only limited compensation because the tribunal found he would have been fairly dismissed a month later when the workplace closed. Total award: £12,419.29.
TUPE transfer and automatic unfair dismissal: employee wins after asserting statutory rights
A former employee of Plau Bistro Limited was automatically unfairly dismissed after asserting a statutory right following a TUPE transfer. The tribunal awarded £2,396.23 for unpaid wages, holiday pay, and notice pay.