Hatten v Crapper [1996] IRCA 613

Hatten v Crapper [1996] IRCA 613

The applicant's employment was seasonal, running from mid November to the end of August with a further two to three weeks of maintenance work if required. Although no precise cessation date was nominated, the end of the fishing season and maintenance period was determined, so the contract was not for an indeterminate period. At the end of each season the applicant accepted an Employment Separation Certificate stating that employment had terminated due to shortage of work, and any later work depended on a new contract. The applicant had only an expectation of re-employment, not an enforceable contractual right. He therefore failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that he was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 1996
Procedural Posture
Application Alleging Unlawful Termination of Employment / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'specified Period Contract' 'seasonal Employment' 'workplace Relations Act 1996 Exclusions']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'specified Period Contract' 'seasonal Employment' 'workplace Relations Act 1996 Exclusions']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Alleging Unlawful Termination of Employment / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's seasonal employment as a deckhand was under a contract of employment for a specified period of time." "Whether the applicant's employment was terminated at the initiative of the respondent or ended by effluxion of time at the end of the crayfish season." 'Whether an expectation of re-employment in the next crayfish season established continuity of employment or a relevant termination under the Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's employment was seasonal, running from mid November to the end of August with a further two to three weeks of maintenance work if required. Although no precise cessation date was nominated, the end of the fishing season and maintenance period was determined, so the contract was not for an indeterminate period. At the end of each season the applicant accepted an Employment Separation Certificate stating that employment had terminated due to shortage of work, and any later work depended on a new contract. The applicant had only an expectation of re-employment, not an enforceable contractual right. He therefore failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that he was...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's application is dismissed."]