Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Buying off the plan?
View our developments

Compo shagger wins big in the Federal court

By johnboy 19 April 2012 30

For some years we’ve thrilled to the tales of the public servant who pulled a local while on a work trip to the country and monstered the hotel room fittings to the point a light came down on her face leading to a Comcare claim.

Comcare said no, the AAT said no, but five years later the Federal Court has said yes according to the SMH.

During the hearing, the woman’s barrister, Leo Grey, said sex was “an ordinary incident of life” commonly undertaken in a motel room at night, just like sleeping or showering.

I’m also curious as to which government agency has a “human relations section”?

The woman, aged in her late 30s, was employed in the human relations section of a Commonwealth government agency.

I mean really, what were they expecting?

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
30 Responses to
Compo shagger wins big in the Federal court
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
dixyland 12:01 pm 22 Apr 12

There are two types of people in this situation:

1. They are embarrassed or laugh it off because shit happens. It’s a great story to bring up.
2. They think the world owes them something so they sue sue sue and try to get compo.

Most people are the former, and I’d like to believe very few are the latter.

I do wonder if she caught and STI, could she have sued for that? Or what if she had gotten pregnant?

dundle 10:37 pm 21 Apr 12

GardeningGirl said :

welkin31 said :

I am puzzled that you would not look to compo from the Hotel/motel insurance policy in this case.
Why do we sucker taxpayers get hit ?

My thoughts exactly! I could understand the government providing the person with some legal assistance if the need arose, because they sent her on the trip and presumably chose the motel, but otherwise isn’t it really between her and the motel?

Because it was a work trip, so she basically has to put in her claim for worker’s comp. I assume Comcare can (and will?) go after the motel if necessary, not her job to do so.

c_c 2:04 pm 21 Apr 12

For those scratching their heads about he job description of “human relations” – it turns out in 1974, Australia had a whole Royal Commission into “human relationships.”

GardeningGirl 12:34 pm 20 Apr 12

welkin31 said :

I am puzzled that you would not look to compo from the Hotel/motel insurance policy in this case.
Why do we sucker taxpayers get hit ?

My thoughts exactly! I could understand the government providing the person with some legal assistance if the need arose, because they sent her on the trip and presumably chose the motel, but otherwise isn’t it really between her and the motel?

zorro29 11:32 am 20 Apr 12

TheGingerNinja said :

the shag heard round the world? seriously though, how you can get a pay out for your own actions, that resulted in said injuries is ridiculous, does this mean i can get compo for pouring hot coffee on myself?

pretty much…it’s not fault legislation so it doesn’t matter how dumb you are, you will get compo if it’s on work time

personally i’d be too embarrassed to say i was injured while having sex but takes all sorts i guess. who would she be having sex with on a work trip anyway??? must be a very different “agency” to mine

just more waste of tax payer $$……sigh sigh

p1 9:41 am 20 Apr 12

Gerry-Built said :

ComCare just seems to dismiss nearly every case presented; hoping that most people won’t have the drive to follow it up – especially over such a long period… Good on her for following this through over such a long term; especially after it became such public knowledge.

This isn’t just ComCare, this is the insurance industry generally. My sister inlaw had perfectly straight forward car insurance (her not at fault) claim rejected flat, and then it took ages of screwing around before they gave her the money.

Gerry-Built 8:48 am 20 Apr 12

I don’t see a problem with this. If you had a car accident whilst traveling for work; treatment would be covered. If you got food poisoning; treatment would be covered. If the light fitting had simply fallen on her during the night whilst sleeping – there wouldn’t have even been a problem with her compo. I don’t think that having sex whilst on a trip away should be considered out of the realms of normal activity. It is simply because sex is involved that the media has followed this – for the titillation…

I have every expectation that Government Departments will now throw together some rules about what is acceptable behaviour on the road for work (if they haven’t already); I’d fully expect high risk (bungee jumping, go-karting, abseiling, skydiving) activities to be banned (as common-sense would tell you), but sex isn’t (usually) high risk; even if vigorous.

ComCare just seems to dismiss nearly every case presented; hoping that most people won’t have the drive to follow it up – especially over such a long period… Good on her for following this through over such a long term; especially after it became such public knowledge.

welkin31 6:39 am 20 Apr 12

I am puzzled that you would not look to compo from the Hotel/motel insurance policy in this case.
Why do we sucker taxpayers get hit ?

HenryBG 11:53 pm 19 Apr 12

screaming banshee said :

The thing that s***s me is the suppression, if we the tax payers have to compensate someone for smacking themselves in the face with a light fitting while screwing around on a work trip the we should bloody well know who it is.

Yep, this is the big issue. She’s put her snout in the trough for *our* taxes so she should have to tell us who she is.

Between useless bludging public servants and conniving parasite lawyers, I’m surprised there’s *any* of our money left for Education, Health and Roads.

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