34 Judgment No. CCZ 2/18 Constitutional Application No. CCZ 86/15 process of governance. It will frequently be true that retrospective application of a new statute would vindicate its purpose more fully. Landgraf v USI Film Products 511 US 244 (1994) at 285286. All that the legislation did was to impose a retrospective obligation to conduct that was past, justifiably so, to achieve fairness and justice. The Legislature took the view that the circumstances of the cases of the terminations of contracts of employment on notice on or after 17 July 2015 revealed unfair results in the nature of the distribution of the benefits and burdens of the terminations between the employers and employees. The impact of the legislation given retrospective effect on the employment relationship defined the line of interaction between private and public interest in termination of contracts of employment on notice at the initiative of the employer. The legitimate legislative purpose of protecting employees, whose contracts were terminated on notice from the harm of loss of employment for no fau lt of their own, ensured that the public interest in the fundamental values of fairness and justice which underlay the employment relationships ought to have been taken into account by employers in terminating employment on notice. Acting in accordance with the fundamental principles of fairness and justice, the employers would have realised that long service employees deserved more than a mere three months’ notice pay. Long-serving employees would have become what they were in society because of their work. Being identified by the work they did would have become a matter of dignity for them deserving of due respect. Moreover, the longer their period of service, the more they would have contributed to the enhancement and wellbeing of their employer’s business.