News & Events

The ‘Trojan Horse’ - The (new) implied term of mutual trust and confidence in Australian contracts of employment

Submitted By Firm: Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Contact(s): John Tuck


Tracey Caspersz & Cara Leavesley

Date Published: 11/11/2013

Article Type:

Share This:

The employment relationship is characterised by a degree of trust and confidence. In a decision delivered on 6 August 2013, a majority of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia in Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker [2013] FCAFC 83 (Jacobson and Lander JJ, Jessup J dissenting)) elevated this feature to a new level.

The majority held that, in the absence of express terms to the contrary, there is an implied term of mutual trust and confidence in every Australian employment contract.

The implications of this for employers could be profound. The implied term was described by Jessup J in his dissent as a ‘Trojan horse’.[1] This seems apt, given the very high level at which the implied term is expressed and its open-ended nature: in fact, the apparent ‘wholesomeness’ of the implied term may conceal a variety of unforeseen obligations.


Over the last 15 years or so, the existence of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in Australian law has been vigorously debated. Its formulation, content and consequences for employers have been explored in a number of cases at various levels of the court hierarchy.

As now expressed by the majority in Barker, the implied term of mutual trust and confidence requires that an employer will not, without reasonable and proper cause, conduct itself in a manner calculated and likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of confidence and trust between the parties.[2]


In 2009, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia undertook a nationwide restructure of its Corporate and Financial Services business unit, resulting in Mr Barker’s position being made redundant. Its Redeployment Policy was to redeploy employees to a suitable position where possible. The Bank’s HR Reference Manual provided that the Policy did not ‘... form any part of an employee’s contract of employment’.

Mr Barker was informed by a letter dated 2 March 2009 that although his position had been made redundant, the Bank’s preference was to redeploy him. Mr Barker was told at the meeting that he should clear out his desk, hand in his keys and mobile phone and not return to work. His email facilities and access to the Bank’s intranet were terminated immediately. However, on 9 April 2009, Mr Barker was advised in writing that his employment was terminated by reason of redundancy. In effect, no real steps to redeploy Mr Barker had been taken prior to his employment being terminated.

By that time, Mr Barker had been employed by the Bank for 23 years. His contract of employment (clause 8) contemplated that his employment may be terminated if the Bank were unable to place him in an alternative position. There was no express term in the contract excluding the potential operation of an implied term of mutual trust and confidence.


At trial before a single judge of the Federal Court of Australia, Mr Barker’s contentions included that the Bank had breached the implied term by not acting in accordance with the Redeployment Policy. Besanko J decided in favour of Mr Barker, finding that:[3]

  • the Policy was not a term of the contract of employment;
  • nevertheless, the contract included the implied term of trust and confidence, which was implied as a matter of law arising out of the relationship between an employer and an employee;
  • the Bank’s failure to take timely and meaningful steps to redeploy Mr Barker in accordance with the Redeployment Policy, before his employment was terminated, was a serious breach of the Policy amounting to a breach of the implied term;
  • Mr Barker was entitled to damages in excess of $300,000 for the loss of the opportunity of the Bank complying with its Policy.


In its appeal to the Full Federal Court, the Bank contended that the trial judge had erred in finding the existence of the implied term. In rejecting the appeal, Jacobson and Lander JJ were persuaded that the weight of authority points in favour of the acceptance of the implied term under Australian law.[4] They reached this conclusion on the following grounds:

  • policy considerations, accepted by the courts in England, support the development of the implied term in a manner consistent with the contemporary employment relationship;[5]
  • on this view, the employment relationship involves elements of common interest and partnership, rather than the characteristics of conflict and subordination associated with the old master/servant paradigm;[6]
  • these elements called for the implication by law of an obligation on the employer (the implied term), the purpose of which is the preservation of the employment relationship.[7]

Further, according to the majority, the implied term only operates in respect of conduct prior to and separate from the manner of termination of the contract of employment – that is, it does not apply at the point of dismissal of an employee or to steps inextricably linked with dismissal.[8]


It is apparent from their reasons for decision that Jacobson and Lander JJ held that the implication of the implied term by law was ‘necessary’.[9]

The test for the implication of a term by law is that of ‘necessity’, the rationale being that it is necessary to prevent the enjoyment of contractual rights otherwise being rendered nugatory, worthless, or seriously undermined. However, it is not clear precisely what were the contractual rights that Jacobson and Lander JJ considered met this characterisation.


For Jacobson and Lander JJ (contrary to the view of Besanko J at first instance), the Bank’s failure to comply with the Redeployment Policy was not the important factor. Instead, they found that the operation of the implied term was triggered by the circumstances that:

  • Mr Barker was a senior employee of nearly 23 years standing;
  • the employer was a large corporate organisation; and
  • the contract (clause 8) contemplated that the employment may be terminated if the Bank were unable to place the employee in an alternative position.[10]

In these circumstances, Jacobson and Lander JJ held that the implied term required the Bank to take positive steps from 2 March 2009 to consult with Mr Barker about the possibility of redeployment and to provide him with the opportunity to apply for alternative positions within the Bank.[11]

It was held that damages were recoverable for the Bank’s breach of the implied term,[12] with a slight variation to the quantum of damages for economic loss as assessed by the trial judge.[13] Jacobson and Lander JJ confirmed that damages for hurt and distress, or loss of reputation arising from the dismissal, are not recoverable when arising from a breach of the implied term.[14]


As an alternative basis for holding the Bank liable, Jacobson and Lander JJ found that the same circumstances triggered the operation of the implied duty of co-operation in the contract of employment.[15]

This implied obligation is anchored upon the need for one party to take positive steps without which the other party is unable to enjoy a right or benefit conferred upon it under the contract.[16]

By analogy to the case where an employee could not be expected to be aware of a benefit unless it is brought to his attention by the employer,[17] Jacobson and Lander JJ held that the circumstances in question also triggered the implied duty of co-operation so that the Bank was obliged to consult with the employee and inform him of suitable employment options.


In a detailed dissenting judgment in which he thoroughly examined the evolution of English and Australian case law dealing with the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, Jessup J concluded that: ‘… the question whether the implied term is part of the law of contracts of employment in Australia has never been answered in the affirmative by an Australian appellate court in the sense of being part of the ratio decidendi’.[18]

His Honour went onto hold that the implied term of mutual trust and confidence was not necessary for the enjoyment of the rights conferred by a contract of employment (for example, it was not necessary in order to give an employment contract commercial and industrial validity). Therefore, the term could not be implied by law.[19]

Jessup J described the implied term as having ‘the potential to act as a Trojan horse in the sense of revealing only after the event the specific prohibitions which it imports into the contract.’[20] His Honour considered that the implied term, if accepted, ‘would enable defined limits in the existing fabric of common law and equitable remedies to be side-stepped’; and that the implied term would overlap a number of legislated prohibitions and requirements …, thus tending to compromise the democratically-drawn architecture’ of relevant employment obligations (such as statutory unfair dismissal and discrimination protections).[21]

Jessup J further held (contrary to the opinion of the trial judge) that the presence of the express reservation in the Bank’s Redeployment Policy ‘did not … leave any scope for the conclusion that by merely failing to comply with the policy, the [Bank] breached the implied term.’[22]


The majority decision in Barker has confirmed, at least for now, that in the absence of express terms to the contrary, there is an implied term of mutual trust and confidence in every Australian employment contract.

The decision raises for consideration whether employers should expressly exclude the implied term from employment contracts. However, doing so may not be straightforward given:

  • the wide formulation of the implied term; and
  • the approach taken by the majority judges, that particular circumstances triggered the operation of the implied term.

From a practical perspective, another important issue for employers to consider is whether seeking to exclude the operation of the implied term of trust and confidence is a ‘good look’ in their interactions with employees. Including an express term in a written contract which excludes the implied term of mutual trust and confidence might not be the best basis for the development of positive employment relationships.

Unless the majority decision in Barker is overturned by the High Court of Australia on appeal, employers now need to add the implied term of mutual trust and confidence and the implied duty of co-operation to their checklist of issues to be mindful of – in addition to matters such as the increasing focus on adverse action claims – in dealings with their employees.

[1] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [308], [340].

[2] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [98], following the original formulation of the implied term in Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in liq) [1998] AC 20.

[3] Barker v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2012] FCA 942 (3 September 2012). See our previous Corrs In Brief, Recent developments: Implied term of trust of confidence, and 'productivity' under the fair work act.

[4] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [79],

[5] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [94]-[95],

[6] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [81], referring to the Full Court of the SA Supreme Court decision in South Australia v McDonald (2009) 104 SASR 344.

[7] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [72], [107].

[8] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [72], [97].

[9] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [90]-[95].

[10] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [110]-[111].

[11] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [112], [117], [130]-[132].

[12] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [133]-[138].

[13] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [151].

[14] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [152]-[158].

[15] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [118]-[128].

[16] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [122].

[17] As in the House of Lords decision in Scally v Southern Health and Social Services Board [1992] 1 AC 294, discussed by the majority in Barker [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [114]-[115], [123], [128].

[18] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [280].

[19] [2013] FCAFC 83 at paras [288]- [295], especially paras [289]-[290].

[20] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [340].

[21] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [340].

[22] [2013] FCAFC 83 at para [351].

Find an Employment Lawyer

View or print a complete ELA member list »

Client Successes

Altra Industrial Motion Inc.

Altra Industrial Motion Inc. has multiple locations in the U.S., as well as Central America, Europe, and Asia. The Employment Law Alliance has proved to be a great asset in assisting us in dealing with employment issues and matters in such diverse venues as Mexico, Australia, and Spain. We have obtained excellent results using the ELA network for matters ranging from a multi-state review of employment policies to assisting with individual employment issues in a variety of foreign jurisdictions.

In one instance, we were faced with an employment dispute with a former associate in Mexico that had the potential for substantial economic exposure. The matter had been pending for over a year, and we were not confident in the employment advice we had been receiving. I obtained a referral to the ELA counsel in Mexico, who was able to obtain a favorable resolution of the dispute in only a few days. Based on our experiences with the ELA, we would not hesitate to use its many resources for future employment law needs.

American University in Bulgaria

In my career I have been a practicing attorney, counsel to the Governor of Maine, and CEO of a major public utility. I have worked with many lawyers in many settings. When the American University in Bulgaria needed help with employment litigation in federal court in Syracuse, New York, we turned to Pierce Atwood, the ELA member we knew and trusted in Maine, for a referral. We were extremely pleased with the responsiveness and high quality of service we received from Bond Schoeneck & King, the ELA's firm in upstate New York. I would not hesitate to recommend the ELA to any employer.

David T. Flanagan
Member of Board of Trustees 

Arcata Associates

I really enjoyed the Conducting an Effective Internal Investigation in the United States webinar.  We are in the midst of a rather delicate employee relations issue in California right now and the discussion helped me tremendously.  It also reinforced things that you tend to forget if you don't do these investigations frequently.  So, many, many thanks to the Employment Law Alliance for putting that webinar together.  It was extremely beneficial.

Lynn Clayton
Vice President, Human Resources

Barrett Business Services, Inc.

I recently participated in the ELA-sponsored webinar on the Employee Free Choice Act.  I was most impressed with that presentation.  It was extremely helpful and very worthwhile.  I have also been utilizing the ELA's online Global Employer Handbook.  This compliance tool is absolutely terrific. 

I am familiar with several other products that purport to provide up-to- date employment law information and I believe that this resource is superior to other similar compliance manuals.  I am delighted that the ELA provides this free to its members' clients.

Boyd Coffee Company

Employment Law Alliance (ELA) has provided Boyd Coffee Company with a highly valued connection to resources, important information and learning. With complex operations and employees working in approximately 20 states, we are continually striving to keep abreast of specific state laws, many of which vary from state to state. We have participated in the ELA web seminars and have found the content very useful. We appreciate the ease, cost effectiveness and quality of the content and presenters offered by these web seminars.  The Global Employer Handbook has provided our company with a very helpful overview of legal issues in the various states in which we operate, and the network of attorneys has helped us manage issues that have arisen in states other than where our Roastery and corporate headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon.

Capgemini Outsourcing Services GmbH

As an international operating outsourcing and consulting supplier Capgemini has used firms of the Employment Law Alliance in Central Europe. We were always highly satisfied with the quality of employment law advice and the responsiveness. I can really recommend the ELA lawyers.

Hirschfeld Kraemer

Stephen HirschfeldAs an employment lawyer based in San Francisco, I work closely with high tech clients with operations around the globe. Last year, one of my clients needed to implement a workforce reduction in a dozen countries simultaneously. And they gave me 48 hours to accomplish this. I don't know how I could have pulled this off without the resources of the ELA. I don't know of any single law firm that could have made this happen. My client received all of the help they needed in a timely fashion and on a cost effective basis.

Stephen J. Hirschfeld

Hollywood Entertainment Corporation

As the Vice President for Litigation & Associate General Counsel for my company, I need to ensure that we have a team of top-notch employment lawyers in place in every jurisdiction where we do business. And I want to be confident that those lawyers know our business so they don't have to reinvent the wheel when a new legal matter arises. With more than 3400 stores and 35,000 employees operating in all 50 U.S. states and across Canada, we rely on the ELA to partner with us to help accomplish our objectives. I have been delighted with the consistent high quality of the work performed by ELA lawyers. I encourage other in-house counsel to use their services, as well.

Ingram Micro

Ingram Micro is the world's largest technology distributor, providing sales, marketing, and logistics services for the IT industry around the globe. With over 13,000 employees working throughout the U.S. and in 35 international countries, we need employment lawyers who we can count on to ensure global legal compliance. Our experience with many multi-state and multi-national law firms is that their employment law services are not always a high priority for them, and many do not have experts in many of their offices. The ELA has assembled an excellent team of highly skilled employment lawyers, wherever and whenever I need them, and they have proven to be an invaluable resource to our company.

Konami Gaming

Our company, Konami Gaming, Inc., is growing rapidly in a very diverse and highly regulated industry. We are aggressively entering new markets outside the domestic U.S., including Canada and South America. I have had the recent opportunity to utilize the services provided by the ELA. The legal advice was both responsive and professional. Most of all, the entire process was seamless since our Nevada attorney coordinated the services and legal advice requested. I look forward to working with the ELA in the future, as it serves as a great resource to the legal community.

Jennifer Martinez
Vice President, Human Resources

Nikkiso Cryo, Inc.

Until recently, I was unaware of the ELA's existence. We have subsidiaries and affiliates throughout the United States, as well as in Asia, the Middle East and Europe. When a recent legal issue arose in Texas, our long-time Nevada counsel, who is a member of the ELA, suggested that this matter be handled by his ELA colleague in Dallas. We are very pleased with the quality and timeliness of services provided by that firm, and we are excited to now have the ELA as an important asset to help us address employment law issues worldwide.

Palm, Inc.

The ELA network has been immensely important to our company in helping us address an array of human resources challenges around the world. I strongly encourage H.R. executives who have employees located in many different jurisdictions to utilize the ELA's unparalleled expertise and geographic coverage.

Stacy Murphy
Former Senior Director of Human Resources

Rich Products

As the General Counsel for a company with 6,500 employees operating across the U.S. and in eight countries, it is critical that I have top quality lawyers on the ground where we do business. The ELA is an indispensable resource. It has taken the guesswork out of finding the best employment counsel wherever we have a problem.

Jill K. Bond
Senior Vice President/General Counsel, Shared Services and Benefits

Ricoh Americas Corporation

We have direct sales and service offices all over the U.S., but have not necessarily had the need in the past for assistance with legal work in every state where we have a business presence. From time to time, we suddenly find ourselves facing a legal issue in a state where we have no outside counsel relationship. It has been a real benefit to know that the ELA has assembled such an impressive team of experts throughout the U.S. and overseas.

A few years ago, we faced a very tough discrimination lawsuit in Mississippi. We had never had to retain a lawyer there before. I was absolutely delighted with the Mississippi ELA firm. We received an excellent result. They will no doubt handle all of our employment law matters in Mississippi in the future. I have also obtained the assistance of several other ELA firms around the U.S. and have received the same outstanding service. The ELA is a tremendous resource for our company.

Roberts-Gordon LLC

Our affiliated companies have used the Employment Law Alliance in connection with numerous acquisitions, and have always been extremely pleased with our ability to obtain the highest quality legal advice on due diligence issues from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. We have found the Employment Law Alliance firms to be not only first rate with respect to their legal advice but also responsive and timely in assisting us with federal and state law issues critical to our due diligence efforts. We consider the Employment Law Alliance to be an important part of our team.

Rockwell Collins, Inc.

We have partnered with many ELA firms on the development and execution of case management strategies with very positive results. We have been very pleased with the legal advice and counsel provided by the law firms we have utilized who are affiliated with the Employment Law Alliance. The ELA firms we have worked with are customer focused, responsive, and thorough in their approach to handling labor and employment law matters.

Elizabeth Daly
Assistant General Counsel


Sanmina-SCI has facilities strategically located in key regions throughout the world. Our customers expect that we will provide them with the highest quality and most sophisticated services in the marketplace. We have that same expectation for the lawyers with whom we do business. With operations in 17 countries, we need to be certain that we have a team of lawyers working together to address our employment law needs worldwide. The ELA has delivered exactly what it promised-- seamless and consistent high quality services delivered in each locale around the globe. It has quickly become a key asset for our human resources department.


We own, manage, and franchise hotels throughout the U.S. and in more than 90 countries. With more than 145,000 employees worldwide, ensuring that we comply with the complex web of local labor and employment laws in every one of these jurisdictions is a daunting task. The Employment Law Alliance has served as an important resource for us and we have benefited greatly from its expertise and long reach. When a legal dispute or issue has arisen in some far-flung place, Employment Law Alliance lawyers have always provided responsive, practical, and cost-effective assistance.

Wilmington Trust Corporation

Wilmington Trust has used the ELA to locate firms in California, Washington State, Georgia, and Europe. Our experience with the ELA lawyers with whom we have worked has always been one of complete satisfaction and prompt, practical advice.

Michael A. DiGregorio
General Counsel