Dear All
i need to know whether employer is bound to give compensation if a employee is met with an accident while coming or going off duty.
Request you to kindly send the court judgement if any.
Thanks in advance
Raj
From India
24i need to know whether employer is bound to give compensation if a employee is met with an accident while coming or going off duty.
Request you to kindly send the court judgement if any.
Thanks in advance
Raj
From India
It all depends upon your contract of employment and scope of work. If you were commuting to work from home, I am afraid you are not entitled. Please see <link outdated-removed> ( Search On Cite | Search On Google ) and Accidents Will Happen | Human Resource Executive Online
Found at Google
From United Kingdom
Found at Google
From United Kingdom
Dear Mr.Raj Is your query related to Indian laws or the laws of other countries? With regards
From India, Madras
From India, Madras
Dear Harikrishnan,
Thank you for questioning. As Raj is from Maharashtra, I would assume it is with reference to India. As I am based in the UK, I have give some links for general information. It would be useful to have your views assuming the query was related to India.
From United Kingdom
Thank you for questioning. As Raj is from Maharashtra, I would assume it is with reference to India. As I am based in the UK, I have give some links for general information. It would be useful to have your views assuming the query was related to India.
From United Kingdom
Dear Raj,
with ref to your Q
This case will come under the act workman's compensations act
which states that : If personal injury is caused to a workman by accident arising out of and in the
course of his employment his employer shall be liable to pay compensation in
accordance with the provisions
as per the above statement case would be analyzed
which will further analyzed into extent of accident i.e
(a) in respect of any injury which does not result in the total or partial disablement
of the workman for a period exceeding three days;
(b) in respect of any injury not resulting in death or permanent total disablement
caused by an accident which is directly attributable to
this calculation is based on formula this sheet is available with labour department
for more details you can get in touch
Regards
DEV
From India, Mumbai
with ref to your Q
This case will come under the act workman's compensations act
which states that : If personal injury is caused to a workman by accident arising out of and in the
course of his employment his employer shall be liable to pay compensation in
accordance with the provisions
as per the above statement case would be analyzed
which will further analyzed into extent of accident i.e
(a) in respect of any injury which does not result in the total or partial disablement
of the workman for a period exceeding three days;
(b) in respect of any injury not resulting in death or permanent total disablement
caused by an accident which is directly attributable to
this calculation is based on formula this sheet is available with labour department
for more details you can get in touch
Regards
DEV
From India, Mumbai
Accident happening while coming to office or going back from office to the place of residence will be treated as accidents during the course of employment which makes the employer or the ESI Corporation (if the employee is covered by ESI), as the case may be, liable to compensate provided the time and place equate. That is, if the accident has taken place at a place on route of office to place of his residence and during the normal time of his coming to or from the office, then he will get benefits considering notional extension of time and place of accident.
Regards,
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Regards,
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Dear All
I am uploading a judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court of India on the subject under discussion in this thread. Though the judgment is under the ESI Act, the principles laid down is applicable to cases under the Employees Compensation Act also. The judgment is available in the website of the Honourable Supreme Court of India
With regards
From India, Madras
I am uploading a judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court of India on the subject under discussion in this thread. Though the judgment is under the ESI Act, the principles laid down is applicable to cases under the Employees Compensation Act also. The judgment is available in the website of the Honourable Supreme Court of India
With regards
From India, Madras
Hello Raj,
Whatever my friends above have replied are very much apt but the only thing is the employee has to prove that he was coming to the work place and going home from the workplace and he had not stopped in between for more than a reasonable time, this has been reflected in many Supreme Court and High court decisions of India. For example, I am a worker and I leave my workplace at 5pm. I do not go directly to my home but I stop myself at a movie theater to watch a movie and from there I leave to my home and I met with an accident. Is employer liable to pay compensation??
In another case, I stop at a restaurant or a bar and consume alcohol, and later I met with an accident, now can I claim ??
Case 3, I stay back at my relative's and later I move home, in such case am I liable ??
Case 4, my shift gets over at 5pm and I am not required/permitted to stay back at my workplace but I stay their playing cards with my other co-workers and leave from there around 8pm, am I liable??
What if in case I stop buy a cool drink from a shop and I continue towards my home?? (here I can claim...)
So hope now you got an idea as to it, and yes when he is liable for compensation implied that he is liable to claim from his insurance too, unless and otherwise not provided fro (or exempted) for under the act.........
(reasonable period, in the sense, there is no fixed amount time, it is left to the discretion of the court, and appears to be reasonable in the view individuals in the normal circumstances...)
Regards,
BSSV
"Yath bhavati tath nashyathi - whatever is created will be destroyed!! Creation is inevitably followed by destruction".
From India, Bangalore
Whatever my friends above have replied are very much apt but the only thing is the employee has to prove that he was coming to the work place and going home from the workplace and he had not stopped in between for more than a reasonable time, this has been reflected in many Supreme Court and High court decisions of India. For example, I am a worker and I leave my workplace at 5pm. I do not go directly to my home but I stop myself at a movie theater to watch a movie and from there I leave to my home and I met with an accident. Is employer liable to pay compensation??
In another case, I stop at a restaurant or a bar and consume alcohol, and later I met with an accident, now can I claim ??
Case 3, I stay back at my relative's and later I move home, in such case am I liable ??
Case 4, my shift gets over at 5pm and I am not required/permitted to stay back at my workplace but I stay their playing cards with my other co-workers and leave from there around 8pm, am I liable??
What if in case I stop buy a cool drink from a shop and I continue towards my home?? (here I can claim...)
So hope now you got an idea as to it, and yes when he is liable for compensation implied that he is liable to claim from his insurance too, unless and otherwise not provided fro (or exempted) for under the act.........
(reasonable period, in the sense, there is no fixed amount time, it is left to the discretion of the court, and appears to be reasonable in the view individuals in the normal circumstances...)
Regards,
BSSV
"Yath bhavati tath nashyathi - whatever is created will be destroyed!! Creation is inevitably followed by destruction".
From India, Bangalore
Dear All, I endorese the views expressed by BSSV on the matter. The test to be applied is whether the injured employee was at the accident site in the capacity of being an employee or otherwise. In other words, was he there because of his employment or he was just like anyone else. The employer would be liable under the EC Act if and only if the accident has occured out of and in the course of employment. There could be notional extension with respect to time and place for the expression during the course of employment but equally important it has to arise out of employment. The cited ruling of Francis D costa lays down the principle. We have successfully defended a matter where a murder took place inside the factory compound during dinner recess. If the accident while commuting is included for compensation then there would be no end to the stretching of the limit because there could be no definite beginning or end to the employment term. The examples quoted by BSSV are a pointer with long distance commuting becoming now a reality otherwise the misuse or abuse would be endless. However where the transport is provided by the employer or where the employer has send the employee on an errand and he met with the accident in discharge of his duties, then of course the employer is liable. Hope the above clarifies. If more details are available we can derive a definite conclusion on the basis of above principles
From India, Bhopal
From India, Bhopal
Dear member
The employer's libaility to pay compensation hinges on the key question whether the accident caused to the employee cam be said to be arising out of and in the course of employment. In order to construe an accident to be arising out of and in teh course of employment, the accident should have nexus with employment. It means that the employee could not have been involved in the accident but for his employment. Since an employee who is travelling to or from work place (from home or to home) cannot be said to be on duty,it is a tricky issue whether an accident occurring on such travel can be really said to be arising out of employmment. To resolve this issue, the courts applied the doctrine of "notional extension" principle to verify whether the employer's time and premises can be extended to the time and place of the accident.In arriving at the conclusion various factors of deviation as those mentioned by BSSV and KKNair as well as factor's like whther he is commuting by the employer's vehicle or on his personal vehicle etc will have to be gone into.You can apply these guidelines and the Francis d costa case to arrive at a decision on the matter
B.Saikumar
HR & labour Law AdvisorMumbai
Mumbai
09930532927
From India, Mumbai
The employer's libaility to pay compensation hinges on the key question whether the accident caused to the employee cam be said to be arising out of and in the course of employment. In order to construe an accident to be arising out of and in teh course of employment, the accident should have nexus with employment. It means that the employee could not have been involved in the accident but for his employment. Since an employee who is travelling to or from work place (from home or to home) cannot be said to be on duty,it is a tricky issue whether an accident occurring on such travel can be really said to be arising out of employmment. To resolve this issue, the courts applied the doctrine of "notional extension" principle to verify whether the employer's time and premises can be extended to the time and place of the accident.In arriving at the conclusion various factors of deviation as those mentioned by BSSV and KKNair as well as factor's like whther he is commuting by the employer's vehicle or on his personal vehicle etc will have to be gone into.You can apply these guidelines and the Francis d costa case to arrive at a decision on the matter
B.Saikumar
HR & labour Law AdvisorMumbai
Mumbai
09930532927
From India, Mumbai
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Construction Accident.zip
Accident report1.doc
IS 3786 ACCIDENT CLASSIFICATION. pdf