ARTICLE
18 March 2013

Compensation For Injuries Sustained During Sex On Business Trip

BL
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Contributor

BLG is a leading, national, full-service Canadian law firm focusing on business law, commercial litigation, and intellectual property solutions for our clients. BLG is one of the country’s largest law firms with more than 750 lawyers, intellectual property agents and other professionals in five cities across Canada.
Back in July 2012, we covered "PVYW v Comcare" (No 2), [2012] FCA 395, which concerned an employee in the HR department of an Australian government agency who was injured on a work-related trip to a country town in New South Wales.
Canada Employment and HR

Back in July 2012, we covered PVYW v Comcare (No 2), [2012] FCA 395, which concerned an employee in the HR department of an Australian government agency who was injured on a work-related trip to a country town in New South Wales. The injuries were sustained, not while she was conducting budget reviews and staff training, but instead during the course of a sexual encounter in her motel room with an old friend she had hooked up with: 'the respondent was injured whilst engaging in sexual intercourse when a glass light fitting above the bed was pulled from its mount and fell on her...', in the words of the court in the most recent round of appeal. The issue was whether physical and psychological injuries sustained while swinging from the chandelier (or something like it) in off-hours while on a business trip were compensable under the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988.

The employment tribunal rejected the claim, concluding that at the time of the injury the employee was not engaged in acts 'associated with her employment' or 'at the direction or request of her employer', nor was the injury 'sufficiently connected' with her job. The Australian Federal Court reversed: PVYW was in the motel room only because her job required it, and an interlude in an overall period or episode of work was still part of being on the job, whether she was playing cards in her room or doing something more fun, unless it involved gross misconduct or self-inflicted (rather than accidental) injuries: PVYW v Comcare (No 2), [2012] FCA 395. That judgment has been upheld on further appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court: [2012] FCAFC 181. The Full Court agreed with the interval/interlude analysis in circumstances where the employer has induced or encouraged the employee to spend the interval or interlude in a particular place or way, absent gross misconduct.

[Link available here and here].

About BLG

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More