Hill and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter came before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerning a claim for compensation by Mr Brian Hill against Comcare. Mr Hill, an employee of the Department of Human Services (DHS), sought compensation for an injury sustained while participating in the DHS Games in October 2015. The dispute centred on whether the injury sustained during the games was an injury arising out of or in the course of his employment, as defined by the relevant legislation.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Hill's participation in the DHS Games, and the subsequent injury, constituted an "injury arising out of or in the course of employment" for the purposes of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (SRC Act). Specifically, the Tribunal considered whether the Department had requested, authorised, encouraged, permitted, or induced Mr Hill to attend and participate in the games, thereby bringing his attendance within the scope of his employment.

The Tribunal considered the legal interpretation of "request" under section 6(1)(c)(ii) of the SRC Act, drawing on case law such as *Commonwealth v Lyon*, *Humphrey Earl Limited v Speechley*, and *Commonwealth v Oliver*. These authorities indicate that a request can encompass situations where an employee is reasonably required, expected, or authorised to undertake an activity. The Tribunal noted that while there was no explicit direction for Mr Hill to attend, the Department encouraged employee participation in the games, provided organisational assistance, and had employees dedicated to its coordination. The Tribunal also referred to *Hatzimanolis v ANI Corp Limited*, which established that an employer's encouragement or inducement for an employee to spend an interval in a particular way could bring an activity within the course of employment.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found that while the Department encouraged participation in the DHS Games, and provided some organisational support, there was no evidence of a formal request or inducement for Mr Hill to attend. The games were funded by participant fees and sponsorships, and attendance was open to non-DHS persons. The Tribunal concluded that Mr Hill's participation was not sufficiently connected to his employment to satisfy the requirements of the SRC Act, and therefore his claim for compensation was not successful.