TUPE transfer found after asset sale of insolvent company: managing director's claim succeeds
A managing director's employment was found to have transferred to the buyer of his insolvent employer's intellectual property and goodwill, even though production stopped for six months.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #tupe
- #economic-entity
- #asset-sale
- #managing-director
- #insolvency
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by Soda Folk Ltd as Managing Director from 2 September 2019.
- Soda Folk Ltd ceased trading on 16 December 2022 and entered administration on 5 January 2023.
- On 19 January 2023, AP Drinks Ltd purchased the intellectual property and goodwill of Soda Folk Ltd, while Windfall Logistics Ltd purchased the stock.
- The claimant was informed by the administrator on 19 January 2023 that his employment was terminated.
- Wellness Capital Ltd (formerly AP Drinks Ltd) resumed the same business activity in July 2023, outsourcing manufacture, marketing, sales, and distribution.
- The tribunal found that the claimant's contract of employment transferred to Wellness Capital Ltd under TUPE on 19 January 2023.
Timeline
-
Claimant started employment
Mr Simon Waterfall began working for Soda Folk Ltd as Managing Director.
-
Soda Folk Ltd ceased trading
Soda Folk Ltd stopped trading after losing a major investor.
-
Administrators appointed
The claimant appointed administrators for Soda Folk Ltd. He was informed that a TUPE transfer was likely.
-
Asset sale completed
AP Drinks Ltd purchased intellectual property and goodwill; Windfall Logistics Ltd purchased stock. The claimant was told his employment was terminated.
-
Consultancy work began
The claimant provided consultancy services to AP Drinks Ltd for two days, receiving £800 plus expenses.
-
AP Drinks Ltd renamed
AP Drinks Ltd changed its name to Wellness Capital Ltd.
-
Production resumed
Wellness Capital Ltd began manufacturing soft drinks, outsourcing production, marketing, sales, and distribution.
-
Preliminary hearing ordered
Employment Judge Quill ordered a preliminary hearing to determine TUPE transfer and effective date of termination.
-
Preliminary hearing day 1
The hearing took place at Watford Employment Tribunal via CVP.
-
Preliminary hearing day 2
The hearing concluded.
-
Judgment issued
Employment Judge Alliott issued the judgment finding a TUPE transfer to Wellness Capital Ltd and dismissing claims against Windfall Logistics Ltd.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the purchase of intellectual property and goodwill from an insolvent company, without taking on staff or tangible assets, constituted a transfer of an undertaking under TUPE, and what the effective date of termination was.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the managing director's contract of employment transferred from Soda Folk Ltd to AP Drinks Ltd (now Wellness Capital Ltd) on 19 January 2023 under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006.
The key reasons were:
- The sale of intellectual property and goodwill, combined with the buyer's intention to resume the same business activity, meant an economic entity had transferred and retained its identity.
- The six-month gap in production did not break the continuity of the business, as the buyer outsourced manufacturing, marketing, sales, and distribution.
- The effective date of termination was 19 January 2023, when the administrator told the claimant his employment was terminated.
No compensation was awarded at this preliminary hearing; the case will proceed to a full hearing on the merits of the unfair dismissal claim.
Lessons & takeaways
- TUPE can apply even when only intangible assets like intellectual property and goodwill are sold, if the buyer continues the same business activity.
- A gap in trading does not automatically prevent a TUPE transfer, especially if the buyer intends to resume the business and does so within a reasonable time.
- Employees of insolvent companies should check whether their contracts have transferred to a buyer, even if they are told their employment is terminated.
- The effective date of termination is key for calculating time limits and continuity of employment; it may be the date the employee is told of dismissal, not the date of the sale.
This case shows that TUPE can apply in unexpected circumstances, particularly when a struggling company's assets are sold off. The managing director of Soda Folk Ltd was told his employment was terminated on the same day AP Drinks Ltd bought the company's intellectual property and goodwill. Despite a six-month gap in production, the tribunal found that the business had transferred as an economic entity that retained its identity.
What the buyer could have done differently
AP Drinks Ltd argued that it had only bought assets, not the business itself. However, the tribunal noted that the buyer intended to resume the same soft drink production and did so in July 2023, albeit with outsourced operations. The key lesson for buyers is that taking over intangible assets like brand names and recipes, with the intention of continuing the same business, can trigger TUPE obligations—even if no staff are taken on initially.
Why this matters for similar claims
For employees of insolvent companies, this decision is a reminder that a TUPE transfer may occur even when the employer appears to have ceased trading. The managing director's claim for unfair dismissal can now proceed against Wellness Capital Ltd, the renamed buyer. The case also highlights the importance of the effective date of termination: the administrator's notification on the sale date was key, not any later date when the employee might have accepted consultancy work.
The tribunal dismissed claims against Windfall Logistics Ltd, which had only purchased stock, confirming that a simple asset purchase without the business's operational structure does not amount to a TUPE transfer.
Similar cases
Bathstore store-by-store sale: no TUPE transfer for head office staff
Five former Bathstore employees failed to prove their contracts transferred to Homebase after it bought 44 stores. The tribunal ruled each store was a separate economic entity and none of the claimants were assigned to a transferred store.
Managing director dismissed by email: £25,000 for wrongful dismissal but protected disclosure claim fails
A managing director with a six-month notice period was dismissed by email after raising concerns about unpaid expenses and pension contributions. The tribunal awarded £25,000 for wrongful dismissal but rejected his protected disclosure claim.
TUPE transfer and unpaid wages: dismissal without notice on transfer day
A Data Partnerships Manager was dismissed without notice on the day his employer announced a TUPE transfer. The tribunal awarded £11,670 for breach of contract and £7,423 for failure to inform and consult.
TUPE transfer during liquidation: protective award and unfair dismissal claims fail, but consultation breach succeeds
Former telemarketing employees lose protective award and unfair dismissal claims after a TUPE transfer from a company in creditors' voluntary liquidation, but win compensation for failure to consult.
