Landers v Dawson [1964] HCA 35

Landers v Dawson [1964] HCA 35

The appellant's injury did not occur during an ordinary recess because, after completing his deliveries and going swimming, he was off duty and on a venture of his own during a substantial interval when his time was entirely his own. Section 8 (2) (b) (i) did not apply because it concerns travel between residence and employment to commence work or return home after work, whereas any return from deliveries to the bakery would have been in the course of employment and the injury occurred during the swimming venture. It was therefore not open to the Board to make an award based on those provisions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Workers' Compensation Appeal / Appeal to the High Court of Australia From the Full Court of the Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['injury Arising Out of or in the Course of Employment' 'ordinary Recess' 'temporary Absence From Place of Employment' 'travel Between Place of Employment and Place of Residence' 'stated Case']
["workers' Compensation" 'employment Law'] ['injury Arising Out of or in the Course of Employment' 'ordinary Recess' 'temporary Absence From Place of Employment' 'travel Between Place of Employment and Place of Residence' 'stated Case']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Workers' Compensation Appeal / Appeal to the High Court of Australia From the Full Court of the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appellant's injury while swimming after completing bread deliveries occurred during an ordinary recess for the purposes of s. 8 (2) (a)." 'Whether the appellant was travelling between his place of employment and his place of residence within the meaning of s. 8 (2) (b) (i) when injured.' 'Whether it was open to the Workers Compensation Board to make an award in favour of the appellant on the stated facts.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's injury did not occur during an ordinary recess because, after completing his deliveries and going swimming, he was off duty and on a venture of his own during a substantial interval when his time was entirely his own. Section 8 (2) (b) (i) did not apply because it concerns travel between residence and employment to commence work or return home after work, whereas any return from deliveries to the bakery would have been in the course of employment and the injury occurred during the swimming venture. It was therefore not open to the Board to make an award based on those provisions.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.']