What was the reason for the decision of the court in the case of Hollis v Vabu Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 44?
A) The worker did not provide labour that required qualifications or skill.
B) The worker could not refuse work.
C) The worker was required to wear the company uniform and was presented as a representative of the company.
D) All of the above.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q13: What are the differences between employees and
Q14: The use of 'outsourcing' and independent contractors
Q15: In which of the following circumstances will
Q16: The case of Zuijs v Wirth Bros
Q17: Which of the following is NOT a
Q19: With respect to casual contracts,an employer:
A)is obliged
Q20: Which of the following statements about the
Q21: Outline the duties of the employer and
Q22: An employee owes their employer a duty
Q23: The terms 'unlawful termination' and 'unfair dismissal'
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents