Melbourne Law School - Theses

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/383

Filters

2003 2
1 1
Reset filters

Settings
Statistics
Citations
Start date: 2000 × Subject: law and legislation × Type: Masters Research thesis × End date: 2003 ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Employment protection of casual employees
    THAM, JOO-CHEONG ( 2003)
    Summary of Argument: This paper aims to make a contribution to the literature by examining the employment protection of workers characterised by the Australian Bureau of Statistics as casual employees (' ABS casual employees'). In undertaking this examination, this paper seeks to compare the employment protection of ABS casual employees with that available to other employees. The examination commences by discussing the key approaches that courts and industrial tribunals have taken in determining whether a worker is a casual employee under a particular industrial instrument. It then analyses the employment protection of ABS casual employees in the following areas: • protection against unfair dismissal; • entitlement to notice at common law and statute; and • protection in the event of redundancies. It concludes that the employment protection of ABS casual employees is generally inferior to that available to other employees with a sub-group of such employees, namely, those engaged pursuant to a series of distinct contracts enjoying even more slender employment protection.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Towards a binding international human rights regime for transnational corporations
    Martin, Shanta ( 2003)
    Since its elaboration in the aftermath of the Second World War, international human rights law has remained primarily concerned with the relationship between the State and the individual; in particular, the obligations that the State owes to individuals (and peoples) and the legal rights that each individual may claim ‘by virtue of being a human being’. Under international human rights law, the State is primarily responsible for upholding and implementing the full diversity of human rights. At the national level, the State is required, as part of its international duties, to ensure that private entities within its jurisdiction do not violate the rights that the State is obligated to protect. Where private entities do violate those human rights, the State has a duty to make available means of redress for victims who have had their rights transgressed. Individuals are therefore entitled to make claims at the national level against those private entities that violate their rights. Where the State fails to protect human rights, including by failing to provide means of redress for private entity violation, it is said to be in breach of its international duties. The rights and duties just outlined constitute the ‘classical approach’ to international human rights law, whereby only the State is obligated to respect, ensure and protect the human rights of individuals. This approach to international human rights law contemplates that the State has international duties that require it to impose obligations on private entities not to violate human rights. Thus the obligations of private entities are derived from international law, but are not imposed directly by international law. (From Introduction)