• Facets (new session)
• Description
• Metadata
• Settings
  • Rule: ActivityStreamsMapasEquivalentb3sb3sifpdbprdf-labelfacetshttp://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/dbpedia#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/opencyc#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/umbel#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/yago#http://dbpedia.org/schema/property_rules#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/SUMO#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/WordNet#http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ldpoplwebskos-transurn:det:rdf:labelvirtrdf-labelvirtrdf-urlNone
    
  • Inverse Functional Properties: Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects
  • "Same As": Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects (recommended) Apply to subjects, objects and predicates (not recommended on big datasets) Apply to predicates only (special use cases only)

About: CFMMEU v Personnel Contracting     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)

CFMMEU v Personnel Contracting, [2022] HCA 1, was the first judgement of the High Court of Australia of 2022. It involved the employment relationship between an individual who signed a contract for services and a labour hire organisation. In a decision led by Chief Justice Susan Kiefel, the High Court departed from the approach widely taken by lower courts in holding a "multi-factorial" approach to determining an employment relationship. The High Court found the totality of the circumstances was not always the correct approach for identifying whether an individual was engaged as an employee or independent contractor. Rather, the contents of a contract may instead indicate the relationship.