Explain in brief the doctrine of "Notional Extension of Employer's Premises."

Question: Explain in brief the doctrine of "Notional Extension of Employer's Premises."

Find the question and answer of Labour Law only on Legal Bites. [Explain in brief the doctrine of "Notional Extension of Employer's Premises."]

Answer

The Doctrine of Notional Extension of Employer's Premises is a legal principle that extends the definition of an employer's premises beyond its physical boundaries to include areas that are not directly under their control but are still within their sphere of influence or management. This doctrine applies to certain situations where employees are injured or harmed while carrying out their job duties in areas outside of the employer's physical premises.

In essence, the Notional Extension of Employer's Premises holds that an employer is responsible for ensuring the safety and well-being of their employees, not only within their actual premises but also in areas that they can influence or control, such as parking lots, company vehicles, and even public areas surrounding the workplace.

One significant case that discussed this doctrine is the case of Wilsons & Clyde Coal Co Ltd v. English, [1937] UKHL 2. In this case, the plaintiff, Mr English, was a miner who worked at a colliery owned by the defendant, Wilsons & Clyde Coal Co Ltd. The colliery had two entrances, one owned by the defendant and the other owned by a third party. Mr English was injured while entering the colliery through the third-party entrance.

The defendant argued that it was not liable for Mr English's injuries because the third-party entrance was not part of its premises. However, the court held that the defendant had control over the third-party entrance and had allowed its employees to use it regularly. Therefore, the court found that the defendant had a duty of care to ensure that the third-party entrance was safe for its employees to use.

The court applied the doctrine of "Notional Extension of Employer's Premises" and held that the third-party entrance was deemed to be part of the defendant's premises for the purpose of determining its liability for Mr English's injuries.

This case established the principle that an employer's liability for its employees' safety extends beyond the physical boundaries of its premises, as long as it has control or influence over the area in question. The doctrine of "Notional Extension of Employer's Premises" has since been applied in many other cases to determine an employer's liability for accidents or injuries that occur on premises that are not owned by the employer but are under its control or influence.

The application of this doctrine depends on the specific circumstances of the case, including the nature of the job, the level of control exercised by the employer over the area in question, and the extent to which the employee was acting within the scope of their employment. For instance, an employee who is injured while making a delivery for their employer may be covered under the Notional Extension of Employer's Premises doctrine, even if the injury occurred on a public street or in a private parking lot not directly owned or controlled by the employer.

The rationale behind the doctrine is to ensure that employees are protected from harm while carrying out their job duties, regardless of the location. It recognizes that the employer has a duty of care towards their employees and that this duty extends beyond the physical boundaries of their premises. This doctrine also reflects the reality that modern workplaces often involve employees travelling to different locations, using public spaces, and interacting with the general public as part of their job duties.

This theory of Notional Extension was laid down by the supreme court in Sowrastra Salt Manufacturing Company v. Bai Velu Raju, AIR 1958:

(i) According to this theory, under certain circumstances, an employer is liable for injuries to his employee, even when the employee is away from the premises at the accident.

(ii) Now, under the theory of Notional extension, the area which the employee passes and repasses in going to and leaving the actual place of work is included.

(iii) An employee may be regarded as in the course of his employment, even though he had not reached or had left the actual premises where he was employed.

(iv) A personal injury caused to the employee by accident in a public place becomes an accident in the course of his employment, only if his employee is then rendering service to his employer or is then discharging some obligation imposed upon him by the contract of employment.

(v) Thus the theory of notional extension of the employer's premises does not extend to the whole of the journey between an employee's residence and the place of work, but only to places where the employee does the work of the employer.

Overall, the Notional Extension of Employer's Premises is an important legal principle that helps ensure that employees are adequately protected and compensated in cases where they are injured or harmed while carrying out their job duties outside of the employer's physical premises.

• Labour Law - Notes, Cases & Study Material
• Law Aspirants: Ultimate Test Prep Destination