破除新加坡的特洛伊木马:对相互信任隐含期限的批判性评价

IF 0.8 Q3 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI:10.54648/ijcl2020015
Kah-Wai Tan
{"title":"破除新加坡的特洛伊木马:对相互信任隐含期限的批判性评价","authors":"Kah-Wai Tan","doi":"10.54648/ijcl2020015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the law of employment contracts, an implied term in law that has held sway over various Commonwealth jurisdictions is the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. The term gives rise to hidden but major implications for employment relations around the world. Yet few seemed to question its utility and foundational basis until the High Court of Australia’s unanimous rejection of the term in Commonwealth Bank of Australia v. Barker. In Singapore, it is also often assumed that the implied term is accepted law even though the legal position actually remains wide open. This article seeks to critically examine the genesis of the term and its operation in Singapore. It also argues that despite the Singapore High Court’s repeated endorsement of this term, there are compelling reasons in both policy and principle as to why such a term should be rejected in Singapore.\nEmployment Law, Implied Terms, Mutual Trust and Confidence, Contract Law, Singapore","PeriodicalId":44213,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dismantling the Trojan Horse in Singapore: A Critical Evaluation of the Implied Term of Mutual Trust and Confidence\",\"authors\":\"Kah-Wai Tan\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/ijcl2020015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the law of employment contracts, an implied term in law that has held sway over various Commonwealth jurisdictions is the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. The term gives rise to hidden but major implications for employment relations around the world. Yet few seemed to question its utility and foundational basis until the High Court of Australia’s unanimous rejection of the term in Commonwealth Bank of Australia v. Barker. In Singapore, it is also often assumed that the implied term is accepted law even though the legal position actually remains wide open. This article seeks to critically examine the genesis of the term and its operation in Singapore. It also argues that despite the Singapore High Court’s repeated endorsement of this term, there are compelling reasons in both policy and principle as to why such a term should be rejected in Singapore.\\nEmployment Law, Implied Terms, Mutual Trust and Confidence, Contract Law, Singapore\",\"PeriodicalId\":44213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2020015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2020015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在雇佣合同法中,对英联邦各司法管辖区具有影响力的法律中的一个隐含条款是相互信任的隐含条款。这个词对世界各地的就业关系产生了隐藏但重要的影响。然而,在澳大利亚高等法院在澳大利亚联邦银行诉巴克案中一致驳回该术语之前,似乎很少有人质疑其效用和基础。在新加坡,人们也经常认为默示条款是公认的法律,尽管法律立场实际上仍然很开放。本文试图批判性地考察这个词的起源及其在新加坡的运作。它还辩称,尽管新加坡高等法院一再支持这一术语,但在政策和原则上都有令人信服的理由说明为什么新加坡应该拒绝这一术语
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dismantling the Trojan Horse in Singapore: A Critical Evaluation of the Implied Term of Mutual Trust and Confidence
In the law of employment contracts, an implied term in law that has held sway over various Commonwealth jurisdictions is the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. The term gives rise to hidden but major implications for employment relations around the world. Yet few seemed to question its utility and foundational basis until the High Court of Australia’s unanimous rejection of the term in Commonwealth Bank of Australia v. Barker. In Singapore, it is also often assumed that the implied term is accepted law even though the legal position actually remains wide open. This article seeks to critically examine the genesis of the term and its operation in Singapore. It also argues that despite the Singapore High Court’s repeated endorsement of this term, there are compelling reasons in both policy and principle as to why such a term should be rejected in Singapore. Employment Law, Implied Terms, Mutual Trust and Confidence, Contract Law, Singapore
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Published four times a year, the International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations is an essential source of information and analysis for labour lawyers, academics, judges, policymakers and others. The Journal publishes original articles in the domains of labour law (broadly understood) and industrial relations. Articles cover comparative and international (or regional) analysis of topical issues, major developments and innovative practices, as well as discussions of theoretical and methodological approaches. The Journal adopts a double-blind peer review process. A distinguished editorial team, with the support of an International Advisory Board of eminent scholars from around the world, ensures a continuing high standard of scientific research dealing with a range of important issues.
期刊最新文献
Litigating the Algorithmic Boss in the EU: A (Legally) Feasible and (Strategically) Attractive Option for Trade Unions? Modern Slavery in Liner Shipping: An Empirical Analysis of Corporate Statements The Requirement of Fair Negotiation (Gebot des fairen Verhandelns) and the Principle of Undue Influence in German and US Employment Law Regulating Platform Work in the UK and Italy: Politics, Law and Political Economy Regulating Algorithmic Management at Work in the European Union: Data Protection, Non-discrimination and Collective Rights
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1