The role of judges in the regulation of Australian employment contracts

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorGolding, G.
dc.date.issued2016
dc.description.abstractPrompted 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.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityGabrielle Golding
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, The, 2016; 32(1):69-91
dc.identifier.issn0952-617X
dc.identifier.issn1875-838X
dc.identifier.orcidGolding, G. [0000-0001-6522-9920]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/109449
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherKLUWER LAW INT
dc.rights© 2016 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands
dc.source.urihttps://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=IJCL2016005
dc.subjectemployment contracts
dc.subjectAustralian courts
dc.titleThe role of judges in the regulation of Australian employment contracts
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Collections

Law publications