Search results

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

In order to succeed in an action under the Equal Pay Act 1970, should the woman and the man be employed by the same employer on like work at the same time or would the woman still be covered by the Act if she were employed on like work in succession to the man? This is the question which had to be solved in Macarthys Ltd v. Smith. Unfortunately it was not. Their Lordships interpreted the relevant section in different ways and since Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome was also subject to different interpretations, the case has been referred to the European Court of Justice.

In a short private member's bill the infamous rule in market overt has been abolished — Sale of Goods (Amendment) Act 1994 which simply states that: 1. Section 22 (relating to the sale of goods in market overt) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979) is hereby repealed. This was one of the proposals in the Department of Trade and Industry's consultation document ‘Transfer of Title: Sections 21 to 26 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979’ (January 1994). This document which looked as if it had been put together in a civil service lunch hour has been widely criticised and as yet the Government show no sign of introducing a coherent lending and security act based on the proposals of the Crowther Committee on Consumer Credit (Cmnd 4596 Part VI 1971 — see Government response ‘Reform of the Law of Consumer Credit 1973 Cmnd 5427 rejecting a proposed Lending and Security Act) and the Diamond Report ‘A Review of Security Interests in Property’ (DTI 1989).

In the first two sections the author discusses and analyses the1 terms of employment implied at common law. Then the implied common law duties of the employer towards his or her employee and the employee towards his or her employer are discussed. Custom, practice and works rules as sources of terms of the contract of employment are then considered.

The purpose of this paper is to provide tests to apply and establish what factors are relevant in determining whether or not an employee had a reasonable expectation of renewal of a fixed‐term contract as envisaged in section 186(1)(b) of the 1995 LRA.

The paper draws from case studies to examine whether these actionable conducts can be defined in a precise way.

The common law scenario, has been materially altered by the provisions of section 186(1)(b) of the 1995 LRA that the employers' non‐renewal of the contract or offer to renew the contract whilst the employee reasonably expected the employer to renew the contract therefore it constitutes a dismissal.

The common law interpreted that where a fixed‐term contract expires, where an express term in the contract stipulates that there is no expectation to renew the contract in the mind of the employee concerned that the contract will be renewed again; the employer will have no contractual remedy available to him. This paper calls upon common law to use and pro‐actively manage labour law responsibilities and further refine the existing dismissal tools.

This paper contributes the rethinking of labour rights is necessary because the social, economic and political environments in which they were first conceived have been fundamentally affected by modern globalization and the expansion of the network society.

A nostrum much quoted in traditional contract law courses is ‘caveat emptor’ (let the buyer beware). Buyers had to look after themselves and protect their own interests. The laissez‐faire philosophy which lay behind this maxim took the view that the operation of unrestrained market forces was the best method for protecting consumers as a whole. Emphasis was placed on free competition providing alternative choices as the best way of satisfying consumer wants. In reality, even in the mid‐19th century when this philosophy was dominant, the consumer was not left without the protection of the law. Freedom of contract notionally existed and much judicial rhetoric was expended on justifying it but in reality the courts were quite astute in protecting consumers in situations where they were the victims of fraud, trading malpractice or unequal contracts.

This article seeks to take a critical look at the proposed Common European Sales Law (CESL).

The article looks at the rationales given to support the enactment of the CESL. The approach is critical in nature seeking to vet the plausibility of the rationales given for a new regulation The article also takes a critical look at the CESL's structure and trilogy of coverage – sale of goods, supply of digital content, and supply of services.

The article exposes some of the shortcomings of the CESL and the dangers to substantive private law of crafting a regulation based on political feasibility.

The CESL as proposed offers some innovative ideas in areas of the bifurcation of businesses into large and small to medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs), as well as rules covering digital content and the supply of trade‐related services. In the end, the analysis suggests a more thorough review is needed to better understand the CESL's interrelationship with the Convention on Contracts for the International Sales Law (CISG) and EU consumer protection law.

Further analysis is needed and unanswered questions need to be answered prior to the enactment of the CESL into law. A practical first step would to begin with a more targeted law focused on internet trading and licensing contracts.

This article questions the rationales given for the enactment of an ambitious new regulation covering disparate areas of sale of goods, supplying (licensing) of digital content, trade‐related services, and consumer protection. It further questions the rationality and practicality of the creation of the designation of SMEs as types of businesses in need of extra protections not currently provided by contract law's general policing doctrines.

The recent House of Lords decision in Carmichael v. National Power plc decided that a casual/zero‐hours worker was self‐employed and thus excluded from most of the basic employment statutory rights. The aims of this article are to note the incidence and characteristics of the casual workforce in the UK and EU; to explore the current legal framework applying to casual workers, including the decision and implications of Carmichael; to note recent and intended legal measures which have particular relevance for casual workers; to evaluate the likely effectiveness of those recent or proposed legal measures; and to consider possible alternative strategies to establish an appropriate framework for casuals.

Within a larger mandate of reviewing the key global trends concerning consumer protection in the electronic commerce (e-commerce) literature, this study aims to study the legal framework concerning e-commerce and consumer protection in the Sultanate of Oman and to analyse the current regulations concerning e-commerce and consumer protection.

This study followed the normative legal research approach and resorted to the desk research process to facilitate content analysis of literature containing consumer protection legislation and regulatory provisions in Oman in particular and the rest of the world in general.

The study reveals that consumer protection initiatives in Oman are well entrenched for offline transactions, but are relatively new and limited for e-commerce. In spite of the promulgation of consumer protection laws, electronic transaction law and cybercrime law, consumer protection measures for e-commerce in Oman do not address a large number of the global concerns necessary to build consumer confidence and trust in the online environment.

There is a dearth of information concerning Oman on this topic in the extant literature. The research also witnessed the lack of empirical data on the issue of consumer protection and e-commerce in Oman that offer a detailed database of consumer complaints and associated outcomes.

The mechanism of consumer protection in electronic transactions is not robust in many countries. Because of the lack of comprehensive and robust legislation, consumers remain vulnerable in the online contractual purchase process. Moving beyond the fragmented legislation, many countries are currently mulling an all-comprehensive e-commerce law, implications of this paper will help the policymakers in identifying the focus areas.

Consumer protection is a burning global issue in this era of consumerism. It is important to build consumer trust, transparency and integrity of transactions to reduce the risk and uncertainties of purchase.

Consumer protection studies conducted in the context of Oman, hitherto, deal more with data protection and dispute resolution mechanisms, and less with legal provisions, regulations and consumer confidence. The study shares newer insights based on a systematic review of legal and business databases. It is the first study of its kind in the context of Oman and the Middle East in general.