The Library of Essays on Law and Privacy

Privacy has now become a major topic not only in law but in computing, psychology, economics and social studies, and the explosion in scholarship has made it difficult for the student to traverse the field and identify the significant issues across the many disciplines. This series brings together a collection of significant papers with a multi-disciplinary approach which enable the reader to navigate through the complexities of the issues and make sense of the prolific scholarship published in this field.

The three volumes in this series address different themes: an anthropological approach to what privacy means in a cultural context; the issue of state surveillance where the state must both protect the individual and protect others from that individual and also protect itself; and, finally, what privacy might mean in a world where government and commerce collect data incessantly. The regulation of privacy is continually being called for and these papers help enable understanding of the ethical rationales behind the choices made in the sphere of regulation of privacy.

The articles presented in each of these collections have been chosen for the quality of their scholarship and their utility to the researcher, and feature a variety of approaches. The articles which debate the technical context of privacy are accessible to those from the arts and humanities; overall, the breadth of approach taken in the choice of articles has created a series which is an invaluable and important resource for lecturers, researchers and student.

Two Views of ‘Subordination’: the Personal Scope of Employment Discrimination Law in Jivraj v Hashwani

In Jivraj v Hashwani, the Supreme Court considered what requirements are necessary for a relationship to be considered as an employment relationship for the purposes of determining the scope of domestic employment discrimination law. The Court held that an element of subordination was necessary for the relationship to be considered employment under a contract personally to do work. This article discusses what the Court in Jivraj meant by this requirement, contrasting two differing views of subordination. It examines some implications of the decision for the relationship between employment law and anti-discrimination law, and for recent debates on the scope of employment law more generally.