|Appears in Collections:||Law and Philosophy Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||The Elective and Automatic Theories of Termination at Common Law: resolving the conundrum?|
|Citation:||Cabrelli D & Zahn R (2012) The Elective and Automatic Theories of Termination at Common Law: resolving the conundrum?, Industrial Law Journal, 41 (3), pp. 346-357.|
|Abstract:||First paragraph: Under general contractual principles, if one party commits a repudiatory breach of contract, the other party is entitled to either terminate or affirm the contract. However, there has been a long-standing debate as to whether the same elective principles apply in relation to the employment contract or whether the law ought to prefer a theory based on automatic termination which posits that one party's unilateral repudiatory breach operates automatically to bring the contract of employment to an end. Different approaches have been tried and tested in England and Scotland which have resulted in the common law being in an unsatisfactory state as it currently stands. The Supreme Court has the opportunity to bring clarity to this area of the law in the upcoming case of Geys v Société Générale, London Branch which was decided by the Court of Appeal on 30 March 2011. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted on 1 November 2011.|
|Rights:||The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
|346.full.pdf||82.48 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 31/12/2999 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependant on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.