A South Australian woman who was injured when she tripped over a pet fence while looking after a colleague’s puppy as she worked from home has won a worker’s compensation case.
The City of Charles Sturt council worker was working from home on September 19, 2022 when she tripped over a 60cm high metal pet fence erected in a doorway to keep her coworker’s dog away from her pet rabbit.
After starting work about 8.30am, the employee, who was permitted to work from home, got up to make a coffee between 9 and 9.30am when she tripped on the fence.
Know the news with the 7NEWS app: Download today 
She fell forward and landed heavily on the ground, hurting her right knee and arm.
The woman felt “instant and extreme pain” and was rushed to the Royal Adelaide Hospital with a fractured humerus.
She claimed to suffer ongoing pain, including “sharp, stabbing pain” and numbness in her right knee as a result of the fall, and returned to full duties six weeks later.
The woman made a claim against the Local Government Association Workers Compensation Scheme in the SA Employment Tribunal, after her initial compensation claim was rejected on the grounds her employment was not a significant contributing cause of her injuries.
In a ruling handed down in the tribunal last week, Auxiliary Deputy President Magistrate Jodie Carrel found the fall took place during “authorised coffee break at her place of employment”.
The employee said the council encouraged her to regularly get up from her desk and submitted a screenshot of a council video that included encouragement to “take regular breaks”, “get out in the sunshine” and “enjoy time with the dog”.
“This was something (the worker) says she would have done had she been working in the office around the same time, as she did not have set times for short breaks over the course of her working day,” Carrel said.
“While there is some evidence that (she) was also going to check on the puppy, I am satisfied on (her) evidence that she was taking an authorised paid coffee break.
Carrel found the worker’s injuries arose from her employment and that she suffered a temporary right knee injury in addition to her shoulder injury.
“The fact (she) created the workplace hazard the day prior, and unbeknown to the council, does not preclude a finding that it is an employment-related cause,” she said.
However, there was dispute over whether ongoing knee pain was caused by the fall or pre-existing conditions.
Carrel said the “inconsistencies in the history” provided by the worker about her symptoms “cast sufficient doubt in the reliability of her evidence” that her continuing knee-related symptoms were called by the fall.
“While I find that (the worker’s) right knee injury, in addition to the right humerus fracture, arises from her employment … I find that it was temporary and I am not satisfied on the evidence before me that it continued beyond 29 September 2022,” she said.
A compensation hearing will be held at a later date.