Enforcement of the employment contract raises a number of interesting issues. Traditionally – stemming from the hugely influential decision in Addis v Gramophone – contracting parties in a variety of jurisdictions have been unable to recover damages for injury to feelings. In the field of commercial law this approach to recovery for mental distress remains uncontroversial. The courts assume that the parties take the risk of injury to feelings arising in the event of breach by the other side. Such an allocation of risk in employment relations is much more questionable. This is particularly so if it is accepted that the employment contract can no longer be characterised as commercial in nature. In my view any such characterisation is outmoded: the employment contract ‘is not a simple commercial exchange in the marketplace of goods or services. A contract of employment is typically of a longer term and more personal in nature than most contracts, and involves greater mutual dependence and trust, with a correspondingly greater opportunity for harm or abuse.’ Given the nature of the employment relationship it cannot be assumed that an employee accepts the sorts of risks that commercial parties do. Indeed it may be said that nowadays employees do not expect to be treated in a humiliating or degrading fashion by their employer. Similarly flawed would be any attempt to defend Addis on the basis of remoteness.