The meaning of 'continuous service' in the Long Service Leave General Order is not defined in the abstract but is ascribed in the context of continuous or unbroken service by reference to the term 'Public Authority', with deeming provisions being a significant and integral feature of that meaning.

'Continuous employment' means a period of unbroken service to an employer by an employee.

The word 'telegraphic' in the definition of construction industry, as used in modern statutory interpretation principles, extends to contemporary communications technologies involving transmission of messages or signals to a distance by electrical or other means, including the internet, and is not confined to historical telegraph systems.

An employer is 'substantially engaged in the construction industry' where the majority of its work falls within the defined construction industry, including maintenance and repairs of works for extraction, refining, processing, or treatment of materials, such that the exclusion in s3(f) for 'routine or minor' maintenance does not apply.

The words 'continuous employment with one and the same employer' mean continuous employment with a single employer; this principle applies even after amendment to remove 'one and' from the statutory language.

An apprentice is expressly included in the definition of 'employee' under s 4(1) of the Long Service Leave Act 1958 (WA), and therefore a period of apprenticeship must be construed as part of an employee's 'continuous employment' for the purposes of s 8(1).

The Explanatory Memorandum to the 2021 amendments clarifies that a period of apprenticeship 'never broke' an employee's continuous employment, and that s 6(7) was inserted to 'ensure' that if an employee is re-employed within 52 weeks after completing an apprenticeship, the apprenticeship service is part of continuous employment.

For an employee to be covered by the Construction Industry Portable Paid Long Service Leave Act 1985 (WA), both the definitions of 'employee' and 'employer' in s3(1) must be met, requiring the employee to be engaged in the 'construction industry' as defined.

The phrase 'employment has been ended by his/her Employer' in the context of pro-rata long service leave requires assessment of the causal connection between the end of employment and the conduct of the respondent; a 'but for' test is inadequate and the appropriate causal connection must be determined by examining the text and context of the relevant provision.

The ordinary meaning of 'by his/her Employer' in relation to termination of employment suggests the employer must have initiated a factual step necessary to end the employment relationship; a resignation is initiated by an employee.

A distinction between employee-initiated terminations and employer-initiated terminations is revealed in the structure of clause 29(11)(a), with pro-rata long service leave available upon employer termination in some sub-clauses and employee resignation in others.

For an employee to have engaged in 'serious misconduct' for the purposes of the Long Service Leave Act 1958 (WA) s8(2)(c)(ii), the misconduct must be of sufficient gravity such as to justify termination of the employment relationship in the context of beneficial legislation, and must be capable of denying the employee an entitlement to a statutory benefit where they have worked for an employer for a lengthy period of time.