1
10
(1)
as a matter of contract;
(2)
as a simple administrative fact, backed where necessary
with the force of prerogative power.
Where the memorandum provides :- "The officer is subject to orders and regulations of the Government .....; and to Colonial Regulations; these regulations do not constitute a contract between the Crown and its servants" the important point about that caveat is that it recognises that the officer may be subject to orders and regulations which are never- theless not binding in contract. Similarly, a court would be justified in looking at the nature of the orders or regulations themselves, including their inherent unsuitability to be incorporated into a binding contract (e.g. may be easily varied by one party) and from this conclude the officer was intended to be "subject to" the regulations
in a way other than contractually.
If the CRS and Government Regulations (including C.S.R.'s do have enforceable authority I cannot see why the Crown would seek to make them terms of a contract. The range of those regulations is well known to us all. By far the greater number have no applicability to individual officers, but are clearly directions to officers in
executive positions or other managerial authority. They encompass directions
as to, e.g.,
1
approval of substantive appointments
promotion
seniority
medical examinations ("all persons not in
Government service must undergo examination
before they are appointed")
appointment of women officers
employment of exprisoners and drug addicts
probation
staff reports
next of kin cards etc. etc.