External

  • Journeys taken where the travel “...was by a route that substantially increased the risk of sustaining an injury when compared with a more direct route; or, was interrupted in a way that substantially increased the risk of sustaining an injury.” [section 6 (2)]

This provision may be used to exclude journey claims only, and have regard to both:

  •       the journey route taken; and
  •       any reasonable interruptions.

Example

An employee, a wool classer, travelled between properties in the State's Southwest.  After leaving his overnight accommodation, he deviated from his most direct travelling route to attend a cricket match, where he stayed for at least six hours.

Driving on that evening, his car left the road and he was seriously injured.  It was implied that he fell asleep at the wheel.

The court found that, by taking the deviation via the cricket match, the probability was that he would have made himself more tired and so was at increased risk of having the accident.

That is not to say a different route cannot be taken or interruptions not occur.

It is the extent of those differences and whether they increase the risk of sustaining injury.  In some cases, the risk of sustaining injury through an alternate route or interruption may actually lessen.

Example

An employee travels a back road route on her way from her employment to her residence and has an accident.

Her claim is rejected as it is contended that taking a winding road increased the risk of sustaining injury.

However, at appeal, the decision is overturned, as it is established that there is significantly less traffic on the back road, and the employee takes less time on her journey, arriving home in daylight rather than after dark.

In this case, the risk of injury associated with traffic, light and depending on the season, probably weather factors, would be significantly reduced.

Reasonable short interruptions to visit the shop to pick up milk or the automatic teller to withdraw money on the way to or from work are not risk taking exercises.  Such interruptions should not be classed as part of section 6 (2) as they are so insignificant as to be an ordinary part of the journey.

Further discussion about increased risk is provided in volume 5, part 4, Journeys.