Litster v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd [1988] UKHL 10 is a UK labour law case concerning the Business Transfers Directive 2001 relevant for the implementing TUPER 2006, though decided under the older 1981 version.

The Court of Session held that, following Spence, none of the employees were employed ‘immediately before’ the transfer.

Lord Templeman held that a purposive approach should be taken, under article 4 of the Business Transfers Directive 77/187/EC.

He noted the remedies provided ‘in the case of an insolvent transferor are largely illusory unless they can be exerted against the transferee’.

[1] The dismissals are ‘required to be treated as ineffective’, employment is ‘statutorily continued’ The Directive applied both to an employee at the transfer moment and one who ‘would have been so employed if he had not been unfairly dismissed in the circumstances described in regulation 8(1)’ (now regulation 7(1)).