“The relevant question is: did the employer induce or encourage the employee to engage in that activity?” a summary of the court ruling said. A majority of judges—Justices Kenneth Hayne, Susan Crennan, Susan Kiefel and Virginia Bell—answered: “No.” Justice Stephen Gageler dissented.
The crucial facts were that the overnight stay was within the two-day period of the work trip and her employer had encouraged the woman to stay in the motel in Nowra, 160 kilometers (100 miles) south of her hometown of Sydney.
“In the absence of any suggestion that she was engaged at the time of injury in misconduct, those facts were sufficient to conclude that the injury the respondent sustained during that interval, and when at that place, was sustained in the course of her employment,” Gageler said.
“The particular activity in which the respondent was engaged at the time she was injured does not enter into the analysis,” he added.
Updated on: October 30, 2013 9:46 IST
