Remarkably, the interaction between common law and statute has not attracted the scholarly attention it deserves, given that it is such a basic component of legal reasoning in common law systems. This is especially true in the law of employment, where the interaction between common law and statute is a pervasive feature of modern employment law. In recent years, scholars have started to rise to the challenge of developing principles to regulate this interaction, and this article provides a contribution to those debates. It builds upon Lord Hoffmann’s controversial judgment in Johnson v Unisys to identify three modes of interaction: statute as pre-emptive of common law development; statute as an analogical stimulus of common law development; and common law fundamental rights. By connecting this analysis to background principles of legislative supremacy and fundamental rights, it argues that Johnson v Unisys provides an attractive constitutional vision of the relationship between Parliament and the courts.

中文翻译：

---

雇佣法中的普通法和成文法

值得注意的是，普通法和成文法之间的相互作用并没有引起学术界应有的关注，因为它是普通法体系中法律推理的基本组成部分。这在就业法中尤其如此，普通法和成文法之间的相互作用是现代就业法的一个普遍特征。近年来，学者们开始迎接制定规则来规范这种相互作用的挑战，本文为这些争论做出了贡献。它建立在霍夫曼勋爵在 Johnson 诉 Unisys 案中的有争议的判决的基础上，确定了三种互动模式：法规作为普通法发展的先发制人；成文法作为普通法发展的类比刺激；和普通法基本权利。