IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indlaw/v54y2025i4p792-815..html

Judging in the Common Law Tradition: Sir Patrick Elias on Employment Status

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Deakin

Abstract

Sir Patrick Elias occupies a unique position in modern British employment law as an academic, practitioner and judge during the period of its expansion from the 1970s to the present day. His insistence on the need for conceptual clarity in legal reasoning has helped prevent the law falling into atrophy and confusion during a time when the volume and granularity of statutory texts was increasing year on year. His employment status case law, while clear, is nonetheless cautiously expressed and is consistent with an approach more widely shared across the British judiciary, of avoiding purpose-orientated reasoning when interpreting legal concepts in their statutory context. A tendency towards formalism in legal reasoning does not necessarily make the law more predictable or straightforward to apply. The emergence of a highly elaborate jurisprudence on the employment status question has fuelled litigation over matters which could have been settled more straightforwardly had a more policy-aware approach to interpretation been adopted. There are historical precedents for retiring the courts from the task of determining employment status to which policy makers might wish to give due consideration.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon Deakin, 2025. "Judging in the Common Law Tradition: Sir Patrick Elias on Employment Status," Industrial Law Journal, Industrial Law Society, vol. 54(4), pages 792-815.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indlaw:v:54:y:2025:i:4:p:792-815.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/indlaw/dwaf041
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:indlaw:v:54:y:2025:i:4:p:792-815.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/ilj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.