Question

Happy Roses Pte Ltd (the “Company”) was seeking to hire a driver for its flower delivery

service. Ken applied for the position and managed to secure an interview. During the

interview, Lina (as the Company’s Human Resource Manager) explained that as the

Company’s business was just starting, the driver was not required to deliver many orders.

Ken was very concerned about working hours as he was studying part-time. Lina noted that

it was “the usual office hours from 9.00am to 5.00pm, Monday to Friday” and assured him

that there is no need to work on weekends.

In addition, she explained that Ken, if hired as the driver, would need to wear the corporate

uniform throughout the workday since all the employees, except for the office staff, are

required to project the same corporate image. Last but not least, she mentioned the

remuneration package, including the medical benefits and annual leave entitlement that is

relevant for the job.

At the end of the interview, Ken was offered the position and he accepted. There was no

signed employment contract as the Company “wanted to keep things simple”.

 

(a) Identify the pre-contractual statements made by Lina (on behalf of the Company) and

determine the nature of such statements. In your analysis, you should clearly explain

which statements would be considered part of the employment contract and the nature

of such statements.

There is no need to analyse the statements that Lina could have made about the

remuneration package.

 

(b) Assuming that there were no other statements made during the interview, discuss one

(1) possible term that could be implied by the courts into the employment

 

contract. Explain your reasons and cite the relevant case law to support your answer.