ipl-logo

Mahmoley V Westpac Company Law

596 Words3 Pages

To maintain the trust and confidence in the employment relationship, both employers and employees need to consider their obligation. When an employer breached the implied trust and confidence of employment, an employee could demand for stigma damage.

An employer has responsibilities such as duty to provide work and wages, duty of care, duty to act fairly and reasonably and so on. Firstly, an employer has obligation to provide opportunities to an employee for their developing skills and pay wages: Collier v Sunday referee . Secondly, an employer has to provide and to maintain a healthy and safe work environment: Kodis v States Transport. In addition, an employer has duty to act fairly and reasonably for their employees. According to Malik case, , two employees suffered to find the employment due to the negative reputation of the former company which was involved in the corruption.

An employee has duties for their employer, for instance, duty to obey for employer 's order, duty to exercise care and skill and duty of fidelity and good faith.. …show more content…

An employee must not damage the employer’s business due to disclosure employer’s information during the period of employment; Gooley v Westpac Banking Corp. In contrast, an employee may suffer from physically and emotionally damage due to the breach of duty by an employer: Malik and Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA; Burazin v Blacktown City Guardian Pty Ltd. In Thomson v Orica Australia Pty Ltd, the mutual trust and confidence was breached by the company as they did not offer the same position of a high ranking saleswoman after maternity leave. In Blackadder v Ramsey, the High Court held that an employee is to be given back to his same position and condition as before if an employer was wrongful dismissed by an

Open Document