Bearing the Economic Loss of Industrial Action: The Payment of Striking Employees under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 292
Author(s):  
Karen Wheelwright
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Economic Loss ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
High Court ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Industrial Action ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right

This article aims to elucidate the legal principles governing the right of striking employees in Australia to payment during periods of industrial action. It explains briefly the common law antecedents to the strike pay provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and discusses in detail a number of decisions that interpret those provisions, including the recent High Court decision in CFMEU v Mammoet, which held that the prohibition on payments to employees who take protected industrial action is confined to the withholding of wages and does not permit employers to withhold other benefits, such as employer-sponsored accommodation. The article argues that, whilst the High Court decision provides a welcome clarification, there is a need for further judicial clarification of the partial work ban provisions in particular. The article discusses the assertions that the Fair Work Act provisions are overly prescriptive and the reasons for this, and suggests that they are unlikely to be relaxed in the current political climate.

The erosion of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in Australian employment law

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 275-297
Author(s):  
Vanitha Sundra-Karean
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Mutual Trust ◽  
Policy Reforms ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
Employment Contracts ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
Interpretive Method ◽  
Employment Rights

Although the implied duty of mutual trust and confidence has long been established as an implied term in employment contracts under English common law, the Australian High Court has recently ruled that it is not part of the common law regulating employment contracts in Australia because the implication of such a term was better regulated under statute. While it is acknowledged that legislation is most effective in regulating substantive employment rights and obligations, a political climate which lends itself to ideologically divergent policy reforms often robs the discipline of its stability. However, if there exists a legal framework apart from legislation, which coheres with it and has the ability to initiate juridical development in the law, as is the role of the common law, the result will be an enrichment of the discipline overall. This paper traces selected English and Australian judicial approaches towards the implication of the duty of mutual trust and confidence in the context of terminations of employment within a statutory regime, culminating with an analysis of the recent Australian High Court decision in Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker (Barker), which has diminished common law’s interpretive role in this regard. Consequently, this paper aims to revitalize common law reasoning by utilizing Dworkin’s judicial interpretive method as the necessary theoretical framework.

scholarly journals Time to Abolish the Rule in Searle v Wallbank for Negligence and Nuisance Claims

2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 101
Author(s):  
Anthony Gray
Keyword(s):  
General Principle ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
General Application ◽  
High Court ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
The Common ◽  
Massive Development

<p>In this article, the author suggests that the old common law rule denying that an owner of property owes a duty of care in respect of escaping animals should be abolished. After discussing the original English case in which this finding was made and the reasons for its creation, the author questions whether the principle remains coherent with other legal principles in tort, including the massive development of the common law of tort in recent years. He concludes that the rule is an anachronism and should be abandoned. If the reasoning for the decision were ever applicable to Australian conditions, it is not applicable any longer. The rule reflects an<br />exception to a general principle of now universal acceptance, without justification. The Australian High Court should take the opportunity to abandon the rule, in favour of the general application of tort principles to resolve such disputes. The courts are an appropriate law reform body in this context.</p>

scholarly journals The Right to Strike and the "Deadweight" of the Common Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 281
Author(s):  
Shae McCrystal
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
Industrial Action ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Principle Of Legality

The hostility of the common law in respect of collective action by workers in the form of strikes is notorious. To provide workers with a right to strike, legislative intervention is necessary. In New Zealand and Australia, legislative enactment of the right to strike has taken the form of the "immunity approach" whereby strike action which meets the prerequisites for protection under the relevant statute receives immunity from common law action, while that which does not remains subject to potential liability at common law.This article analyses the adoption of the immunity approach in Australia under the relevant federal industrial relations statutes that have operated since 1993. Commencing with discussion of the hostility of the common law to collective action and the principle of legality, a presumption of statutory interpretation that presumes Parliament would not have abrogated common law rights without an express intention to do so, this article examines how the scope of protected industrial action in Australia has been consistently narrowed through hostile judicial interpretation. Such interpretation has been grounded in an approach which narrows the extent that common law rights are restricted by the statute and construes the statutory enactment of a right to strike as conferring a "privilege" on those industrial actors who remain "worthy" enough to access it.Considering the progressively negative impact on the right to strike of this approach, the argument in this article echoes calls made by Gordon Anderson in 1987 to reject the continued role of the common law in the regulation of industrial action. It is argued that the law of strikes in Australia should be codified. Such an approach should assist in downplaying judicial tendencies to interpret the right to strike as a privilege rather than as a necessary component of a functioning system of voluntary collective bargaining.

scholarly journals New Zealand Trustee Investing: Reflecting on Modern Portfolio Theory and the Ancient Distinction of Principal and Income

1998 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 611
Author(s):  
F Philip Manns Jr
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Portfolio Theory ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Modern Portfolio Theory ◽  
High Court ◽  
Trust Funds ◽  
The Common ◽  
Trust Law

The New Zealand Trustee Amendment Act 1988 led the common law world in encouraging (perhaps requiring) trustees to use modern portfolio theory ("MPT") techniques when investing trust funds.  A recent High Court decision essentially held that trustees should have engaged in MPT-based investment since 1972.  Full integration of MPT principles into trust law affects many areas of trust administration, perhaps most prominently the ancient distinction of principal and income.  In addition, renewed attention to careful drafting of a settler's investment and pay out intentions and greater investment diversification are likely consequences of MPT-based trust investing.

Liberating Malawi's Administrative Justice Jurisprudence from Its Common Law Shackles

2011 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danwood Mzikenge Chirwa
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Administrative Justice

AbstractThe 1994 Malawian Constitution is unique in that it, among other things, recognizes administrative justice as a fundamental right and articulates the notion of constitutional supremacy. This right and the idea of constitutional supremacy have important implications for Malawi's administrative law, which was hitherto based on the common law inherited from Britain. This article highlights the difficulties that Malawian courts have faced in reconciling the right to administrative justice as protected under the new constitution with the common law. In doing so, it offers some insights into what the constitutionalization of administrative justice means for Malawian administrative law. It is argued that the constitution has altered the basis and grounds for judicial review so fundamentally that the Malawian legal system's marriage to the English common law can be regarded as having irretrievably broken down as far as administrative law is concerned.

scholarly journals The publication of judicial decisions as a reason for convincing precedent

1970 ◽  
pp. 195-199
Author(s):  
Roman Sabodash
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
General Idea ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
State Register ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right

The paper shows how the publication of court decisions influenced the formation of a precedent. The author reviewed scientific works devoted to research the precedent in common and continental law. The research explains that the formation of precedent in England was accompanied by development of the judgment’s reviews and their prevalence among lawyers. Of course, publication of court decisions was not a major factor in setting a precedent, but it played a significant role in this. The paper also describes facts of the publication of court decisions in Italy, Germany, France and the Netherlands, as well as the admissibility of their citations at the court of cassation. The general idea of the paper is that convincing precedent exists and is used although the countries of continental law do not have a «classic» precedent. The paper gives a review of the importance of the state register of court decisions for setting a convincing precedent in Ukraine. The author analyzes the pros and cons of citing court decisions. It’s stated that, unfortunately, the quotations of court decisions is not always correct and sometimes amounts to rewriting the «right» legal position without comparing the circumstances of the case. The article concludes that the practice of applying a convincing precedent in Ukraine is only emerging and needs further improvement.          It has been found out that the publication of judgments of supreme courts is one of the factors that helped to establish precedent in common law countries. The publication of court rulings also created the conditions for a convincing precedent in civil law countries (especially in private law). At the same time, the formation of a “convincing precedent» in countries where court decisions are published in publicly available electronic court registers is much faster than in common law countries. Of course, the structure and the significance of the precedent in the common law and civil law countries are different, but one cannot dismiss that publication of court decisions as one of the factors for establishing the precedent.

scholarly journals GOOD FAITH IN FRANCHISE CONTRACT

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (19) ◽  
pp. 118-127
Author(s):  
Nurli Yaacob ◽  
Nasri Naiimi
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Relational Contracts ◽  
Law System ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Term Contract ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

Good faith has been defined as justice, fairness, reasonableness, decency, taking no chances, and so on. The concept of good faith has long been rooted in contract law under the jurisdiction of Civil law, although the definition of it is still debated until today. However, the view of the Common Law tradition does not recognize the concept of good faith as long as the contract is entered into with the freedom of contract and both parties abide by the terms of the contract. Given that a franchise contract involves a long-term contract and always been developed, it is impossible to define both rights and responsibilities base on express terms only. As such, the franchise contract gives the franchisor the right to exercise its discretion in executing the contract. It is in this context that the element of good faith is very important to ensure that the franchisor does not take advantage of the franchisee and that the business continues to prosper. Therefore, the objective of this article is to discuss the concept of good faith in a franchise contract. The findings show that the common law system that initially rejected the application of the concept of good faith also changed its approach and began to recognize the concept of good faith as it is very important for relational contracts such as franchise contracts.

scholarly journals Roles of the Courts in New Zealand in Giving Effect to International Human Rights - with Some History

1999 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J Keith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Common Law ◽  
General Effect ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Domestic Law

The Right Honourable Sir Kenneth Keith was the fourth speaker at the NZ Institute of International Affairs Seminar. In this article he describes and reflects upon the role of courts and judges in relation to the advancement of human rights, an issue covered in K J Keith (ed) Essays on Human Rights (Sweet and Maxwell, Wellington, 1968). The article is divided into two parts. The first part discusses international lawmakers attempting to protect individual groups of people from 1648 to 1948, including religious minorities and foreign traders, slaves, aboriginal natives, victims of armed conflict, and workers. The second part discusses how from 1945 to 1948, there was a shift in international law to universal protection. The author notes that while treaties are not part of domestic law, they may have a constitutional role, be relevant in determining the common law, give content to the words of a statute, help interpret legislation which is in line with a treaty, help interpret legislation which is designed to give general effect to a treaty (but which is silent on the particular matter), and help interpret and affect the operation of legislation to which the international text has no apparent direct relation. 

Third Party Beneficiary: A Comparative Analysis

1976 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriela Shalev
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Common ◽  
Comparative Survey ◽  
The Right

Chapter 4 of the new Israeli Contracts (General Part) Law, 1973, introduces the concept of a contract in favour of a third party, while granting express recognition to the right of a third party beneficiary. Even those, (including the author) who maintain, that the right of a third party beneficiary could and should be derived, even before the commencement of the new Law, from the general principles and premises of the old Israeli law of contract, cannot fail to see in the above-mentioned chapter an important innovation in the Israeli legal system.This paper is a comparative analysis of the institution of third party beneficiary. The analysis will consist of a presentation and critical examination of the central concepts and doctrines involved in the institution under discussion, and it will be combined with a comparative survey of the arrangements adopted in various legal systems. The choice of this approach stems from the particular circumstances of the new legislation.While in most countries, comparative legal research is a luxury, in Israel it is a necessity. The new legislation in private law is inspired to a great extent by Continental codifications. As far as the law of contract is concerned, Israel is now in the process of becoming a “mixed jurisdiction”: departing from the common law tradition and technique, and heading towards an independent body of law, derived from various sources, mainly Continental in both substance and form.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document