"Personally, I believe that many people are simply outraged that a woman was completely upfront and honest about the background her injury (a little too honest methinks) and if the sex did not contribute to the fallen light fitting, then she is just as entitled to compensation as if the accident had occurred while sleeping."

Really Ammonite? What role does gender have to play in this fiasco? The issue is about where the so-called responsibility of the Employer to health and safety stops?

I agree that if the light fitting was faulty then compensation is due. If on the other hand (which seems more likely, since there would have been little explanation due otherwise) the injury was caused as a result of unreasonable outside of work activity then responsibility rests with her and/or her companion.

This is akin to the burglar who sues the owner of the premises he was in process of robbing for an injury caused by tripping over a childs toy. Sorry but I'm over the spurious claims. It's about time there was a crackdown and it needs to go further than knocking back Ms Shagalot's grasping ambitions.

'In general if an employer sends a staff member out of town for work then the employer's responsibility does not just end at the end of the business day. The employer has a responsibility to ensure the employee is accommodated somewhere safe.

However I think it's unfair to say the employer should somehow be responsible for injuries a staff member sustains outside defined working hours or away from any work- organised event.'

I disagree with the last part above. If the employer insists that an employee be away from where they'd normally be in order to attend a work function - then employer is responsbile for their safety at all times. If the employer does not want to cover this, then they should not require employees to attend such functions etc.

I would have to say that I am not necessarily supportive of this particualr claim, however if the employer had not required her to attend the function, then she may well not have met her acquaintance and not suffered her injury - you could certainly make a case for her.

What if 'Ms Shagalot' contracted a sexually transmitted disease as a result of her extra-curricular activities? How about if she did her fck buddy an injury? God forbid the scenario but what if her tryst resulted in pregnancy?

Is her Employer somehow RESPONSIBLE?

As an employer myself, and one who values and goes the extra mile to reward and keep GOOD productive employees happy in their jobs (useless ones can rejoin the jobseeker queue as soon as I can offload them) I expect Staff members sent on out of town assignment to exercise same care and personal responsibility that he/she would 'at home'. They are instructed to behave in a way that reflects well on the Company during work hours or at work related functions. That includes warning about immoderate alcohol or illicit substance use. Individual accommodation arrangements are made in reputable establishments and meal allowances provided.

Should my employee choose to engage in recreational activities after work hours that is their perogative. Just as I am not responsible for what they do once they arrive home after work here, I don't consider any difference because they are away. Should they go out drinking, fall down and hurt themselves - that is their responsibility. Get into a fight and get injured - ditto or their assailant. Should they find someone who agrees to engage in sexual activity, the most PERSONAL and non-work related activity I can think of unless your business is prostitution, then any repercussion of that is their problem.

If they suffer any injury during travel to or from work, during working hours including work related functions then I have a responsibility. Otherwise NO. It is about time this CRAP was cleared up