Wright v Department of Education and Children's Services [2006] SAWCT 65

4 I make the following findings based on statements and the documentary evidence that was contained in the Trial Book.

5 Mr Wright was employed by the respondent as a mathematics teacher at Heathfield High School in the Adelaide Hills. As a consequence of his diligence, limited experience, recent appointment to a new school and the requirement that he attend to marking and preparation of assignments, he continued working most evenings at home.

6 The security arrangements at the school required teachers to leave the school by 5.00 pm so that alarm systems could be activated.

7 He worked at home in the evening on most school nights. He usually worked in his home office until about 11pm. Most teachers at the school did this.

8 At about 6 pm on 15 March 2005 he was driving from work towards his home at Lynton when his car hit a tree on Sheoak Road, Belair. He suffered a closed head injury. He has no memory of the accident.

9 Mr Wright had intended to spend his evening marking mathematics tests and prepare for classes. There was a tub of schoolwork in his car at the time of the accident.

10 Both Ms Rusk and Ms Fischer were aware that Mr Wright took work home in the evenings. Ms Rusk expected this of a teacher who taught Year 12 as Mr Wright did. Ms Rusk encouraged teachers to go home and work rather than remain at the school.

11 The Full Tribunal has recently canvassed the authorities in relation to journey accidents in Rapson v WorkCover Corporation/Allianz Australia Workers Compensation (SA) Ltd (F Westphal Nominees Pty Ltd) [2006] SAWCT 48. Among the decisions it referred to was the decision of The Corporation (The City Swim School) v Rowberry A 1 /1996 in that decision it was noted that:-

"a place of residence can have a dual personality and in an appropriate case be a place of employment such that a journey from it to the place of employment can be seen as a journey from one place of employment to another."

12 In Owen v Department of Education Training and Employment [2001] SAWCT 104 Cawthorne DPJ referred to the travel on her bicycle by a deputy principal as:-

"one step in a sequence of actions which would enable her to complete tasks at home on the evening in question and over the week end that were directly related to work".

13 Cawthorne DPJ went on to say:- "in undertaking the journey in this case the applicant was doing something reasonably incidental to the performance of her job".

14 In TransAdelaide v Karanicos 3/4/96 SASC 5536 Doyle CJ said the question that needed to be answered in relation to these matters was:-

"whether one would say that in undertaking the journey the worker was performing the worker's job complying with an instruction from the employer or given by the employer in the exercise of its control as employer, or doing something reasonably incidental to one of those things." (par 23).

15 Section 3 of the Act defines a place of employment as "a place where a worker is required to carry out duties of employment".

16 The issues raised for clarification by Rapson are broad_._ The facts of this case have a narrow compass.

Was Mr Wright in the "course of carrying out duties of employment"?

17 Mr Lines contended that the work at home was discrete from the work at school. I accept that is so. He also argued that by undertaking the journey he was not doing anything he was employed to do. It is true that the journey was in part for a private purpose, that is, so that Mr Wright could reach his home. But in my view the act of transporting schoolwork home that he intended to work on that night did involve Mr Wright in doing something he was employed to do.

18 In my view Mr Wright's journey home was incidental to him being able to carry out his work at home. He was transporting his students' maths tests and other work in the car with him at the time of the accident with the intention of undertaking that work at home.

19 The Principal of the school in effect placed Mr Wright under an obligation to continue his work at home by instructing him that, for safety and security reasons, he could not stay at school to complete his work.

20 Mr Wright's home was a place where he was going to carry out duties of his employment on the evening of 15 March 2005. His trip home was incidental to the performance of the out of hours work at home necessitated by his teaching duties which included marking students' school work and preparing for lessons in the evening.

Is there a real and substantial connection between the employment and the accident?

21 As I have found for Mr Wright in relation to the first issue it is unnecessary for me to decide whether there was a real and substantial connection between his employment and the accident.

22 In my view Mr Wright was carrying out the duties of his employment as he drove to his home because he was required to undertake after hours work at some place other than school for security reasons and he was transporting the tub of schoolwork with the intention of working on it that evening when he had his car accident.

23 Therefore the determination rejecting Mr Wright's claim for compensation should be set aside and in lieu thereof a determination be substituted accepting the claim.

24 I give the parties liberty to apply with respect to any issues that arise relating to the quantum of Mr Wright's entitlement or the duration of his incapacity.

An appeal against any part of this decision pursuant to s 86(1) of the Act must be filed with the Registrar within 14 days of the delivery of this decision. The form titled Notice of Appeal must be used. The Notice must be served on all parties.

[1] Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act S 30(5) A disability that arises out of, or in the course of, a journey arises from employment only if -

(a)

the journey is undertaken in the course of carrying out duties of employment; or

(b)

the journey is between - .....

(i) the worker's place of residence and place of employment.... and there is a real and substantial connection between the employment and the accident out of which the disability arises.