In Jackson v Computershare Investor Services plc, the Court of Appeal (CA) has confirmed that TUPE safeguards employees’ existing rights but does not give transferred employees access to benefits other than those to which they were entitled before the transfer. Mrs Jackson had been employed by CI since 1999. Her employment transferred to Computershare in 2004 by virtue of TUPE. One year later, she was made redundant. Computershare operated a redundancy scheme that provided enhanced terms for employees who had joined it before March 2002. Mrs Jackson was not paid an enhanced redundancy payment on the basis that she was treated as joining Computershare in 2004, not 1999, as she claimed she should have been. The Tribunal agreed with Mrs Jackson, holding that under TUPE her contract was deemed to have begun in 1999 and she should be treated as joining Computerserve from that date. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) overturned that decision. In rejecting Mrs Jackson’s appeal from the EAT, the CA held that TUPE could not be used to “miraculously” transform her into someone who joined Computershare pre-2002 and she was not entitled to an enhanced redundancy payment.