4 Cases of Compensation Law Claims You Wouldn't Believe Were Successful

Claiming government-funded workers compensation for an injury whilst having sex in a motel?

Claiming negligence after slipping on a chip in the supermarket?

Workers compensation for a flight attendant in a motorcycle injury on a day off?

Suing Google for negative associations with you in their search engine?

These are just a sampler of the colorful compensation claims that have turned law precedence on its head in 2012, offering a goldmine of news opportunity for the Australian media.

The potential precedents set as a result of recent compensation claims include:

Workers Compensation on your Day Off

On the surface it may sound ridiculous but the case has strong merits. It specifically involved the plaintiff making a motor vehicle injury claim as a result of driving to get his Visa - which he was required to organise for his employment. The court president ruled that '[The workman was doing something that he was] reasonably required, expected or authorised to do in order to carry out his work duties'.

Defamation Claims for Negative Search Engine Name Associations

The plaintiff in this scenario had been a victim of having his name associated with organised crime after being an innocent shooting victim in a 2004 incident. After Google ignored his request to remove the links, a jury ruled against Google in favor of the plaintiff. This case may open a potential stream of defamation claims against search engines, a concept that U.K courts have already foreseen by legally stating that search engines are machines, not publishers, eliminating the responsibility of name associations from its search listings.

Having Sex Included as a 'Ordinary Incident of an Overnight Work Trip'

In June, a woman received ComCare compensation for facial injuries as a result of a light fixture coming out of the wall during sexual activity. As a result sex is now considered as a 'lawful recreational activity' of overnight work trips. The defence argued that while it was a regular activity, it was not necessary. The judge stated that if she had been playing cards and been injured, she would have been entitled to compensation, regardless of her employers encouragement to engage in the activity.

Disregarding the Amount of Time a Physical Hazard has been Present

After years of legal battling, a woman has finally received compensation from shopping giant Woolworths after her crutches slipped out from under her as a result of contact with a greasy chip stain in a shopping aisle. As a result, the court will now need to take into consideration all facts of a 'slip and fall' injury claim, not just establishing how long a hazardous substance has been on the ground.