Fox v NSW Police Force [2012] NSWIRComm 134

Procedural Posture

Appeal Concerning Refusal of Hurt on Duty Benefits Claim / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Decision of Ritchie C

Legal Issues

1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted.' "Whether the appellant's injury was received on a compensable journey under s 10 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987." "Whether s 10(4) prevented the injury from being treated as occurring on a journey because it occurred within the boundary of the appellant's place of abode." "Whether the appellant's return home was an interruption or deviation within s 10(2), or an abandonment of the journey." 'Whether the injury arose out of or in the course of employment within s 4 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.' "Whether the appellant's employment was a substantial contributing factor to the injury under s 9A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987."]

Ratio Decidendi

The injury was not compensable as a journey claim because the appellant had abandoned his journey to work by returning to his place of abode and was injured within the boundary of that abode, so s 10(4) applied and his intention to continue to work was irrelevant. The injury also did not arise out of or in the course of employment and employment was not a substantial contributing factor: the appellant was not proved to be undertaking police duties at home, the collection of glasses and a USB was geographically and temporally remote from work, and the immediate activity when injured was returning to give his wife a farewell kiss, a non-employment activity.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

• ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']