Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||The role of judges in the regulation of Australian employment contracts|
|Citation:||The International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, 2016; 32(1):69-91|
|Abstract:||Prompted by the Australian High Court’s decision in Commonwealth Bank of Australia v. Barker,1 this article assesses judicial law-making through terms implied by law in Australian employment contracts. In Barker, the court refused to imply a term of mutual trust and confidence, influenced in part by a judicial disinclination to trespass into the province of the legislature. The article examines what role judges ought to play in regulating Australian employment contracts. It concludes that, following the High Court’s decision in Barker, the symbiotic relationship between statute and the common law ought to be reinvigorated. To facilitate that reinvigoration, the article proposes the creation of statutory default minimum rules for the employment relationship. However, it will also argue that the courts must remain willing to imply terms by law into employment contracts because it is impossible for parliament to predict all future gaps that may need to be filled.|
|Rights:||© 2016 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands|
|Appears in Collections:||Law publications|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.