Business Law - solution of the specific case

Pages 4 (1004 words)
Download 0
Monica being the owner of the restaurant and catering business engaged Joey as chef in her restaurant. It is true that Joey was working in the restaurant on regular basis. Monica's stand that she did not withhold any PAYG tax, considering her to be an independent contractor does not make any difference.


Joey suffered injuries while working in Monica's restaurant. When an employee works in an establishment it is the duty and responsibility of the owner to provide necessary safety measures to the employees. If an employee sustains any injuries while carrying out the work for the employer, the employer has got the responsibility to bear the cost of hospitalization of the injured employee and has to pay compensation in monetary or otherwise, if the question arises.
As such Joey is entitled to have the above benefits. She can claim for the benefits under Worker's Compensation Insurance, because it was the duty of Monica to put her under the insurance coverage. Joey can also seek legal remedies as per The Fair Work laws, which gives her the minimum entitlements of benefits of an employee in terms of
Rachel is a courier, trading under her 'own registered business name'. She is totally an independent contractor and is not a paid employee of Monica. Though she acts as a courier of Monica, she lacks the status of an employee of Monica. So Monica must consider Rachel as an independent contractor. The issue is similar to the case of: AMP Society v Allen and Chaplin (1978) 52 ALJR 407.
If Monica considers Rachel as a part-time employee, she has to treat her in that status and has the responsibility to bring her under the provisions of The Fair Work Laws, and also she has to adhere to the terms a ...
Download paper
Not exactly what you need?