{"title":"新西兰的“工人”、劳工法庭和普通法:三位一体?","authors":"Isaacus K. Adzoxornu","doi":"10.26686/NZJIR.V15I1.3488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The primary purpose of this article is 2 fold: firstly, to argue that not only have industrial tribunals in New Zealand incorrectly interpreted the statutory term \"worker\", but also that in doing so, they have assumed a jurisdiction which has never been conferred on them by statute; and secondly, to make some suggestions towards reform of Labour Court practice in this crucial area.","PeriodicalId":365392,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand journal of industrial relations","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The \\\"worker\\\", the Labour Court and the common law in New Zealand: a holy trinity?\",\"authors\":\"Isaacus K. Adzoxornu\",\"doi\":\"10.26686/NZJIR.V15I1.3488\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The primary purpose of this article is 2 fold: firstly, to argue that not only have industrial tribunals in New Zealand incorrectly interpreted the statutory term \\\"worker\\\", but also that in doing so, they have assumed a jurisdiction which has never been conferred on them by statute; and secondly, to make some suggestions towards reform of Labour Court practice in this crucial area.\",\"PeriodicalId\":365392,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Zealand journal of industrial relations\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Zealand journal of industrial relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26686/NZJIR.V15I1.3488\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand journal of industrial relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26686/NZJIR.V15I1.3488","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The "worker", the Labour Court and the common law in New Zealand: a holy trinity?
The primary purpose of this article is 2 fold: firstly, to argue that not only have industrial tribunals in New Zealand incorrectly interpreted the statutory term "worker", but also that in doing so, they have assumed a jurisdiction which has never been conferred on them by statute; and secondly, to make some suggestions towards reform of Labour Court practice in this crucial area.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
