Workplace Law | Custom PHD Thesis

Workplace Law
You must first read these general instructions carefully.
This assignment assesses content in Topic 2.The topic considers the legal test identifying‘Who is an employee at Common Law?’ This is an independent individual assignment. The assignment is an analysis of two cases. It is in the form of a case note which requires high level analytical skills in comparing the 2 judgments.
*Please note I will also be recording a lecture on the assignment which will be uploaded by the end of week 1.
Due Date and Word Count
The assignment is due by on Friday4thDecember 2015by 11.59pm.
The assignment is a maximum of 2000 words (excluding footnotes) and is worth 20% of your total mark.You are permitted a small 10% leeway in relation to the word count. That is, you may submit an assignment that is no less than 1800 words or no more than 2200 words.
If you submit an assignment above or below this you will be penalised 4 marks for every 100 words thereof. If this mean that you fail the assignment because of this then the assignment will not be marked.
Extension of time applications
Extension of time applications are scrutinised carefully. Written requests for extensions of time will only be considered if the request is made no later than 12pm on Tuesday 1st December 2015. Any request must be accompanied with supporting documentation such as a medical certificate. If this documentation is not provided by with the request the application will not be considered. All requests are assessed on a case by case basis. Please do not assume you will be granted an extension purely on the basis of a medical certificate. Requests that are considered ‘exceptional’ will only be accepted.
My email is victoria.lambropoulos@deakin.edu.au.
Penalties for late submission
Assignments or other assessment tasks conducted during the trimester submitted late without an extension being granted will not be marked. These will be held until final grading and may be taken into consideration in a pass/fail situation.
Rubric
Students should read the rubric for further guidance regarding the marking of the assignment.

Specific Instructions Regarding the Format of the Assignment
All papers must be typed double-spaced, in a clearly readable 12 point font. Further, students mustuse headings and sub-headings throughout the assignment as it structures the assignment and shows the reader how you have organised your analysis. It is expected that all students are well versed in the current version of the Australian Guide to legal citation (AGLC). Assignments submitted without correct referencing will lose marks. ALL students must submit the assignment on line through CloudDeakin. There is no requirement to submit a hard copy.
All papers must have a title page stating the word length and their name. Assignments will then be returned on line.
Reading Material for the Assignment
The assignment asks you to examine the legal reasoning of 2 cases. The cases deal with other legal issues too which we look at later in the course however you are only required to examine the reasoning relevant to content in Topic 2. Therefore, confine your research to the question being asked.
Please however start by reading the article by Marilyn Pittard, ‘Independent Contractor versus Employee: A Question of Legal Approach?’ June 2015 Employment Law Bulletin62-67. You can find this article online through the lexisnexis database.
You are also free to do your own independent research which may help you in answering the question. Please look at the relevant databases of westlaw, lexisnexis and CCH. Sifting through what is relevant is a task which students are also assessed on. It is therefore up to students to independently make a judgment call on which material they refer to and which material they can discard.

Question
The legal test for determining whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor is ‘notorious for its imprecision in application.’ Two recent full federal court appeals appear to have added to the confusion in the area.
You are asked to read the cases of Fair Work Ombudsman v Quest South Perth Holdings Pty Ltd and Others [2015] FCAFC 37; 228 FCR 346 (North, Barker and Bromberg JJ) and Tattsbet Limited v Morrow [2015] FCAFC 62;(2015) 321 ALR 305 (Allsop CJ, Jessup and White JJ).
Then explain the differences in the reasoning used in the decisions to identify whether the worker was an employee or independent contractor.
Then explain why these cases have caused confusion regarding the applicable legal principles.
Marking Structure
Students must structure their assignment by including the following points:-
1. Explain the relevant facts and outcomes of each case. Please confine your discussion to the issue of whether the Court decided that the relationship was one of employment or independent contractor. (5 marks)

2. (a) Explain the relevant reasoning used in each appeal.

(b) Then describe the differences in the reasoning by comparing the two cases. This is where you must identify the issues which are in contention that means the disagreement between the two cases in the application of the legal test.

(12 marks)

3. The rest of the marks will be allocated to issues such as coherent organisation of assignment (so it is readable); legal writing quality and standard and ensuring the assignment complies with the correct referencing style.
(3 marks)