Ireland v Ian Johnson Ceo of the Department of Corrective Services

[2009] WASCA 162

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Industrial Law
2. › Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission
3. › Jurisdiction
4. › Claim for benefits denied under contract of employment
5. › Whether prisoner an employee
6. › Whether contract of employment existed between prisoner and prison authority
7. › Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA), s 29(1)(b)(ii), s 90(1)(b)
1. Contract
2. › Formation
3. › Intention to create legal relations
4. › Objective assessment
5. › Whether statutory framework governing prison work precluded contractual intention
6. › Prisons Act 1981 (WA), ss 7(1), 16, 95
7. › Prisons Regulations 1982 (WA), regs 43, 44, 45
1. Statutes
2. › Construction
3. › Meaning of 'employment' and 'employed'
4. › Whether words confined to employment under contract of service
5. › Words of wide signification given plain and ordinary meaning unless contrary shown
6. › Prisons Act 1981 (WA), s 110(1)(f)
7. › Prisons Regulations 1982 (WA), reg 43

Quick Take

Work performed by prisoners, whether remand or sentenced, does not give rise to a contract of employment with the prison authority. The relationship is entirely statutory, governed by the Prisons Act 1981 (WA) and Prisons Regulations 1982 (WA). A prisoner who applies to work as a remand prisoner makes only the choice to apply; once granted, the relationship is governed by statute with no scope for contractual negotiation. Accordingly, prisoners cannot bring claims for denied contractual benefits under s 29(1)(b)(ii) of the Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA).