Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Business

We develop leaders who transform
business, society & economies

Compo shagger hits the High Court

By johnboy 8 August 2013 36

In a testament to bloody mindedness on both sides of the case the ABC reports that the infamous compo shagger’s case is now being heard by the highest court in the land:

The High Court is hearing a case where a public servant wants workers compensation after being injured while having sex during a work trip in 2007.

The incident happened when the public servant travelled to a New South Wales country town as part of her job.

She suffered injuries to her face after a light fitting came off the wall while she was having sex in her room.

We await the judgment with some interest.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
36 Responses to
Compo shagger hits the High Court
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
milkman 6:58 am 09 Aug 13

LSWCHP said :

milkman said :

LSWCHP said :

She put her weight on a light fitting, and perhaps the blokes weight as well. If I saw one of my kids doing something like that I’d scold them and tell them to stop it because they might get hurt.

2 things:

1) How do we know it was a bloke?

2) You’d scold your kids for rooting while hanging off a lamp shade?

1. I recall seeing an article stating that it happened in Nowra, and the other party was “a local man”. Not that it matters either way.

2.I can find humour in most things, but not in flippant comments about little kids having sex, mine or anybody elses.

1. Thankyou for the source.

2. I thought your comment related to when your kids were ‘of age’, not while they were little. I thought it was funny that you’d know details of your childrens’ sex lives involving climbing on things other than people.

bd84 12:31 am 09 Aug 13

OLydia said :

JesterNoir said :

I still don’t understand what her having sex has to do with it.
She was away on a work trip, and was injured during said work trip, whilst in the (probably work sanctioned) accommodation.
What does the specific activity have to do with it?

+1

Using the same argument, I’ll bring my girlfriend into the office during the day and have sex with her. If I fall off my chair while doing the deed and injure myself, I should be entitled to compensation for a work related injury. The sex was incidental to me being at work yeah?

You’re still at work when on work trips. Your activities are expected to be reasonable work activities and I would guess within the code of conduct.. I don’t remember sex being included as an acceptable activity in there.

The ambulance chaser’s case should never got past the first hurdle.

troll-sniffer 11:02 pm 08 Aug 13

JesterNoir said :

I still don’t understand what her having sex has to do with it.
She was away on a work trip, and was injured during said work trip, whilst in the (probably work sanctioned) accommodation.
What does the specific activity have to do with it?

Not very hard to counter this line of argument: If I went away on a work trip and decided it would be fun to climb out my window and launch myself onto the top of a moving car. If I survived, would my work be responsible for paying me damages etc? Get real people, there are pretty obvious boundaries between what is considered normal behaviours and activities that are expected when on a work trip, and those that are considered by any reasonable measure to be personal choices of risk. Hanging on to a light fitting that was not designed to be hung on to (whether during sex or not) is clearly a personal choice of activity with an inherent risk that could never have been forseen by any reasonable employer and that’s what the case should be based on, not some overtly simple line of reaoning such as we have above.

OLydia 9:53 pm 08 Aug 13

JesterNoir said :

I still don’t understand what her having sex has to do with it.
She was away on a work trip, and was injured during said work trip, whilst in the (probably work sanctioned) accommodation.
What does the specific activity have to do with it?

+1

LSWCHP 9:27 pm 08 Aug 13

milkman said :

LSWCHP said :

She put her weight on a light fitting, and perhaps the blokes weight as well. If I saw one of my kids doing something like that I’d scold them and tell them to stop it because they might get hurt.

2 things:

1) How do we know it was a bloke?

2) You’d scold your kids for rooting while hanging off a lamp shade?

1. I recall seeing an article stating that it happened in Nowra, and the other party was “a local man”. Not that it matters either way.

2.I can find humour in most things, but not in flippant comments about little kids having sex, mine or anybody elses.

screaming banshee 9:19 pm 08 Aug 13

milkman said :

LSWCHP said :

She put her weight on a light fitting, and perhaps the blokes weight as well. If I saw one of my kids doing something like that I’d scold them and tell them to stop it because they might get hurt.

2) You’d scold your kids for rooting while hanging off a lamp shade?

Wouldn’t you?

milkman 9:04 pm 08 Aug 13

LSWCHP said :

She put her weight on a light fitting, and perhaps the blokes weight as well. If I saw one of my kids doing something like that I’d scold them and tell them to stop it because they might get hurt.

2 things:

1) How do we know it was a bloke?

2) You’d scold your kids for rooting while hanging off a lamp shade?

screaming banshee 7:47 pm 08 Aug 13

Stevian said :

JesterNoir said :

I still don’t understand what her having sex has to do with it.
She was away on a work trip, and was injured during said work trip, whilst in the (probably work sanctioned) accommodation.
What does the specific activity have to do with it?

Exactly, having sex is just a red herring that the media has latched onto to sell papers/adspace. The simple question is “Did the light fitting come loose when subjected to reasonable use or was it subject to excessive force?” What she was doing at the time is irrelevant.

Please do enlighten us all as to reasonable use of a light fitting. Does the manufacturers operating manual advise that the fitting may be used for thrusts up to 30lb per thrust and at a rate of no greater than 6 thrusts per minute?

LSWCHP 7:40 pm 08 Aug 13

As others have noted, the fact that she was having intercourse at the time of the event (it wasn’t an accident) is irrelevant. If she’d been having a shower and fell over and hurt herself then there would be no question that she was entitled to workers comp IMHO. If she’d been having intercourse and the bed collapsed and she hurt her back then she’d be entitled to compensation.

However, I think she contributed in a major way to her injuries, and I don’t like to see stupidity rewarded. She put her weight on a light fitting, and perhaps the blokes weight as well. If I saw one of my kids doing something like that I’d scold them and tell them to stop it because they might get hurt.

I reckon she deserves compensation because ultimately it wouldn’t have happened if she hadn’t been there because of her work. But the amount needs to substantially reduced due to her contributory negligence.

I am not a lawyer though, so only Zoroaster knows how this will pan out.

CraigT 7:10 pm 08 Aug 13

Blen_Carmichael said :

neanderthalsis said :

I hope the transcripts become publicly available so we can all have a laugh. I am rather curious as to how she was hit in the face with a light fitting whilst having a naughty.

I’m not sure that it will: the plaintiff’s name, together with certain details of the claim, was suppressed at the AAT, supposedly because there was “evidence that the applicant may act on suicidal tendencies if the reasons were made public”. It may well be that there were good reasons for suppressing her name and other information. On the other hand she may be a neurotic, self-centered princess. As with much of these matters, the newspaper’s brief summary is a poor alternative to hearing all the details in court.

Cool, so the take-home lesson there is that a successful application for a suppression order can be obtained through simply blackmailing the court with threats of suicide.

If she isn’t too embarrassed to have the taxpayer fund the results of her personal decision to shag, then she should be identified.

I am sure that anybody else, injured at work would not be too embarrassed for their claim to be made public unless they were engaged in an embarrassing scam.

What a competent legal system we enjoy….

Blen_Carmichael 6:01 pm 08 Aug 13

neanderthalsis said :

I hope the transcripts become publicly available so we can all have a laugh. I am rather curious as to how she was hit in the face with a light fitting whilst having a naughty.

I’m not sure that it will: the plaintiff’s name, together with certain details of the claim, was suppressed at the AAT, supposedly because there was “evidence that the applicant may act on suicidal tendencies if the reasons were made public”. It may well be that there were good reasons for suppressing her name and other information. On the other hand she may be a neurotic, self-centered princess. As with much of these matters, the newspaper’s brief summary is a poor alternative to hearing all the details in court.

Masquara 5:37 pm 08 Aug 13

Commonsense test surely would set the bar at “no compo if she was using the light fitting for a purpose it wasn’t intended for” and also “she behaved irresponsibly and endangered herself”. Light fittings are NEVER installed for the purpose of grabbing onto and with the expectation that they will take the weight of one human being, let alone two! If she had grabbed onto the bedhead, different story. If the bedhead wouldn’t take it, though, that would be the fault of the motel.

tuco 5:33 pm 08 Aug 13

Photos or it didn’t happen.

Deref 5:14 pm 08 Aug 13

steveu said :

a bunch of ambulance chasers winding up a client to make money, as the generally do.

Hear, hear. Whatever the outcome, the ambulance chasers will win.

Silentforce 4:51 pm 08 Aug 13

Two applicable APS Code of Conduct seem to stand out here:

•”act with care and diligence in connection with APS employment”; and
•”at all times behave in a way that upholds the APS Values and Employment Principles, and the integrity and good reputation of the employee’s Agency and the APS”.

My question is that if “at all times” was considered by the various courts, does this mean that any Cth public servant can lodge a successful sex-injury related claim, even when it happened at home?

Spiral 3:48 pm 08 Aug 13

So did she tell her partner to stop because she was suddenly feeling light headed?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site