Pollock v Stickfast Labels Pty Limited (In Liq)

The appellant, Pollock, sought to appeal a decision concerning a claim for workers' compensation against the respondent, Stickfast Labels Pty Limited (In Liq). The dispute centred on whether a personal injury sustained by the appellant arose out of or in the course of his employment. The appeal was heard by Meagher and Ipp JJA, and Foster AJA.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the appellant's injury, sustained after he had stopped his authorised work to administer a dose of heroin, could be considered to have arisen out of or in the course of his employment. This also raised the question of whether, in these specific circumstances, section 14(2) of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* was applicable to the claim.

The court reasoned that the act of administering heroin was not an authorised activity and was undertaken for the appellant's sole personal purpose, entirely separate from his employment duties. Consequently, the injury sustained during or after this act did not arise out of or in the course of his employment. The court found that section 14(2) of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987*, which deals with injuries occurring during breaks, was not applicable as the appellant's actions were not incidental to his employment.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.