The South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) dismissed ReturnToWorkSA's claim that the function was a social event and not a work event and fell within the exclusion outlined in section 7(7) of the State Return to Work Act 2014.
ReturnToWork had appealed a previous decision that found a hairdresser’s involvement in a social activity was undertaken at the request of the employer and that the employment was a significant contributing cause of that injury.
The incident happened in November 2018 when the employee, a hairdresser employed by Karrara Hair & Beauty Centre, accepted her employer's offer to attend a fully paid work Christmas party.
The celebration included overnight lodging, lunch, unlimited alcohol, and a spa bath, and took place at a resort in Aldinga. The employee tried to step out of the spa while intoxicated, but she slid on the tiles and fell, breaking her hip and leg.
The employee submitted an application to ReturnToWork for weekly disability benefits and medical expenses. Her application was rejected on the grounds that she had not been ordered to attend the party and, as a result, had failed to prove the injury happened in the course of her employment.
In reviewing the regulator's decision earlier this year, SAET Deputy President Judge Mark Calligeros concluded that the worker had been encouraged to attend the Christmas function and went on to find the worker's employment was a significant contributing factor to her injury, as required by section 7(2)(a) of the RTW Act.
However, ReturnToWork argued that because the worker's employer had not “induced or encouraged” her to attend the Christmas party, it was not responsible for her injuries. It supported this claim with a number of High Court decisions.
Appeal rejected
In the appeal hearing, the full bench of the tribunal – Deputy President Judge Tony Rossi, Judge Miles Crawley and Deputy President Magistrate Stephen Lieschke – rejected ReturnToWork’s submissions.
“Detailed and adequate reasons were given for the conclusion that the hip and leg injury arose from the [employee’s] employment,” Deputy President Rossi said.
“Given the findings of fact made, and noting that causation is a question of fact, the finding of the trial judge that the hip and leg injury arose from employment was reasonably open – no error of law vitiating the decision has been demonstrated and the appeal must be dismissed.
“A number of the decisions and actions of [the employer] significantly contributed to the occurrence of the injury suffered by [the worker]. This included the nature of the venue, the supply of alcohol and the expressed desire that the employees have a good time.”
The full bench found no error in the previous decision and rejected ReturnToWork’s appeal to deny compensation for the worker.
