GN 2.4 Journey claims
Application: This guidance does not apply to exempt workers
Overview
An injury does not need to occur while a worker is physically at a workplace in order to be compensable. A worker who is injured away from their place of work but who is in the course of employment at the time of injury may be entitled to compensation.
For instance, a personal injury (not being a disease injury) received by a worker on any journey to which section 10(3) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (1987 Act) applies is deemed to have arisen out of or in the course of employment. However, there must be a 'real and substantial connection' between the employment and the accident or incident which results in the injury, for journeys to/from a worker’s place of abode.
This guidance considers journey claims, including personal injury on a journey, the meaning of 'real and substantial connection', and dis-entitling conduct.
Journey claims
Personal injury on a journey
Section 10(1) of the 1987 Act provides that a personal injury received by a worker on any journey to which this section applies is, for the purposes of the Act, an injury arising out of or in the course of employment, and compensation is payable accordingly.
The injury sustained by the worker must be a personal injury (within the meaning of section 4 of the 1987 Act).
A worker on a journey covered by section 10 of the 1987 Act who contracts or aggravates a disease is not entitled to compensation.
Section 9A of the 1987 Act (employment must be a substantial contributing factor to the injury) does not apply to an injury sustained on a journey as defined in section 10 of the 1987 Act. Instead, section 10(1) of the 1987 Act deems a journey injury to be one 'arising out of or in the course of employment'.
'On any journey to which this section applies'
The journeys to which section 10 of the 1987 Act applies include those between:
- the worker’s place of abode and place of employment
- the worker’s place of abode or employment and an educational institution which the worker is required by the terms of their employment, or is expected by their employer, to attend
- the worker’s place of abode or place of employment and a place to which they are travelling in order to obtain treatment, a medical certificate, or payment of compensation for a work injury
- any camp or place where the worker is required to reside temporarily or where it is reasonably necessary for the worker to reside temporarily and the worker’s place of abode
- a journey between a worker’s place of abode and a place of pick-up (refer to Clause 14, Schedule 1 to the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 – deemed workers/place of pick-up)
- the worker’s place of abode and place of employment in order to pick up wages or other money
- one place of employment to another place of employment with another employer.
'Place of abode'
Place of abode includes not only a worker’s usual residence but also the place where a worker spent the night before commencing a relevant journey and the place where the worker is intending to stay the night following a relevant journey (refer to the definition of place of abode in section 10(6) of the 1987 Act).
A journey from a worker’s place of abode commences at, and a journey to a worker’s place of abode ends at, the boundary of the land on which the place of abode is situated (section 10(4) of the 1987 Act). If the worker lives in a house, this will be the boundary line. If the worker lives in a unit, it will be the boundary line of the land on which the block of units is situated.
A place of employment may also be, for a period of time, a place of abode. The complexity that can arise was examined in the matter of Sydney Local Health District v Fragar [2014] NSWWCCPD 59.
What does 'real and substantial connection' mean?
For injuries sustained on journeys to or from a worker’s place of abode on or after 19 June 2012, there must be a real and substantial connection between employment and the accident or incident out of which the injury occurred.
The 2012 amendments introduced section 10(3A) to the 1987 Act. Section 10(3A) provides that a journey referred to in subsection (3) to or from the worker's place of abode is a journey to which this section applies only if there is a real and substantial connection between the employment and the accident or incident out of which the personal injury arose.
Note: The changes to journey provisions in 2012 do not apply to exempt workers.
It is important to understand that the requirement is for there to be a real and substantial connection between the employment and the accident or incident – not between the employment and the injury.
For many journey claims between home and work, this connection between employment and the accident or incident can be difficult to establish. The mere fact of travelling to or from work will not be enough to satisfy the section.
In Alexander v Secretary Department of Education and Communities [2015] NSWWCCPD 41 a worker was granted paid leave to attend a graduation ceremony. While travelling to the ceremony from the place of employment, the worker died as a result of a traffic accident. The facts of the case did not establish that there was a real and substantial connection between the employment and the accident or incident.
A real and substantial connection between the employment and the accident or incident was found in Namoi Cotton Co-Operative Ltd v Easterman (as Administrator of the Estate of Easterman) [2015] NSWWCCPD 29.
Disentitling conduct
Interruption to or deviation from the journey
An interruption to or deviation from a direct journey to or from work does not necessarily disentitle a worker.
There is no entitlement to compensation for a journey injury if the personal injury was received during or after any interruption to or deviation from the journey and the interruption or deviation was made for a reason unconnected with the worker’s employment or the purpose of the journey, unless, in the circumstances of the case, the risk of injury was not materially increased because of the interruption or deviation (section 10(2) of the 1987 Act).
A worker need not take the most direct route between home and work to be on a journey. A worker may choose a longer route to allow him or her to achieve a purpose additional to the journey provided the journey still retains the character of a journey between home and work.
Whether an interruption to a journey has the effect of creating two journeys, neither of which fits the statutory specification, is a question of degree and fact. Each case must be determined on its particular facts.
Serious and wilful misconduct; influence of alcohol or other drugs and medical or other condition of the worker
There is no entitlement to compensation for a journey injury if:
- the personal injury is attributable to the serious and wilful misconduct of the worker (section 10(1A) of the 1987 Act)
- the worker was under the influence of alcohol or other drugs (within the meaning of the Road Transport Act 2013) unless the alcohol or other drug did not contribute in any way to the injury or was not consumed or taken voluntarily (section 10(1B) of the 1987 Act)
- the personal injury resulted from the medical or other condition of the worker and the journey did not cause or contribute to the injury (section 10(1D) of the 1987 Act).
Phone 13 10 50
Email [email protected]