{"id":12312,"date":"2019-11-29T11:49:56","date_gmt":"2019-11-29T00:49:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/?p=12312"},"modified":"2019-11-29T11:49:56","modified_gmt":"2019-11-29T00:49:56","slug":"australian-business-law-review-update-vol-47-pt-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/2019\/11\/29\/australian-business-law-review-update-vol-47-pt-4\/","title":{"rendered":"Australian Business Law Review update: Vol 47 Pt 4"},"content":{"rendered":"

*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU. If you are using Checkpoint, the links can be found in the Checkpoint PDF <\/strong>at the bottom of this post.<\/p>\n

To purchase an article, please email: LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com<\/a> or contact us on 1300 304 195 (Australian customers) or\u00c2\u00a0+61 2 8587 7980 (international customers) during business hours (Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AST).<\/p>\n

The latest issue of the Australian Business Law Review <\/em>(Volume 47 Part 4) contains the following material:<\/p>\n

EDITORIAL<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c General Editor: Michael Terceiro <\/em><\/p>\n

Articles<\/h3>\n

\u00e2\u20ac\u0153Why Not Litigate?\u00e2\u20ac\u009d <\/strong>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c The Royal Commission, ASIC and the Future of the Enforcement Pyramid<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Michael Legg and Stephen Speirs<\/p>\n

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission in response to the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry has reconsidered its previous regulatory enforcement practice and adopted a new strategy that is summarised as \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Why not litigate?\u00e2\u20ac\u009d. This article critiques the new strategy from the perspective of its impact on the enforcement pyramid derived from the Responsive Regulation theory and considers the future of the lower levels of the pyramid, namely negotiated outcomes and the compliance approach to regulation.<\/p>\n

The Lawfulness of the Dismissal\/Termination of an Employee Who Has Expressed \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Unwelcome\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Religious Views<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Anthony Gray<\/p>\n

The question of the lawfulness of the termination of an employee in relation to their social media activity has been the subject of intense media interest in recent months. This article considers several legal arguments on point, including the possible question of unlawful termination in the Fair Work legislation, arguments about discrimination, breach of contract and other arguments. It concludes that, as the law presently stands, it would generally be difficult for an employee who has terminated in relation to unwelcome social media activity to successfully bring legal action against their employer, subject to a consideration of the specific terms of the employment agreement and facts of any given case. It considers relevant case law in other jurisdictions, accepting that these occurred within a different legal framework.<\/p>\n

Online Auctions and Consumer Protection in the United Kingdom and Australia: The Value of Transparency<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Jodi Gardner and Kanchana Kariyawasam<\/p>\n

This article analyses the challenges associated with online auctions and consumer protection. Online auctions are increasing in popularity \u00e2\u20ac\u201c however, they come with a range of potential legal issues. This article focuses on two potential concerns under the laws of both the United Kingdom and Australia: first, when an online auction fulfils the requirements of an auction for the purposes of consumer protection legislation; and second, when online auction sales occur \u00e2\u20ac\u0153in trade or commerce\u00e2\u20ac\u009d. Both of these \u00e2\u20ac\u201c apparently simplistic \u00e2\u20ac\u201c questions highlight the complexity of the laws surrounding online auctions. Such complexity undermines the transparency of the legal system and puts consumers at risk of not understanding or appreciating their rights. The article concludes by making some initial points on potential reforms to improve transparency in the regulation of online auctions.<\/p>\n

The Legal Implications of E-commerce for the Australian Franchise Sector<\/a> <\/strong><\/em>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c Zhanna Kremez, Kanchana Kariyawasam and Lorelle Frazer<\/p>\n

Business-to-consumer electronic commerce plays a vital role in modern business practices throughout the world. Many traditional retailers ventured into the online transactional space decades ago, while franchise chains have taken a more conservative approach in e-commerce adoption due to potential encroachment and the history of franchisor-franchisee litigation, among other reasons. This study analysed Franchising Code of Conduct, the Australian Consumer Law, relevant case law, in addition to the data from the interviews with franchise experts, adding a rich practitioner insight to this article. It found that the revised Franchising Code may have wide implications for how Australian franchisors conduct e-commerce resulting in greater e-commerce adoption. In addition, due to the change in the legislation, franchisors are being forced to review their e-commerce strategy as well as their legal documents, which may give rise to further development of e-commerce in the Australian franchising sector.<\/p>\n

CONSUMER PROTECTION<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Professor Jeannie Patterson<\/em><\/p>\n