Accidents during work travel: Are you covered under personal injury claims?

BY MICHAEL ‘LEKAN ODUNLAMI

In personal injury law, accidents that happen while travelling for work bring up a question that comes up all the time: are you covered if you get hurt while travelling for work? In Nigeria, the answer depends on why the employee is travelling, how much control the employer has over the trip, and how the trip relates to the employee’s job. The “course of employment” test is used by courts to determine if an accident is a work-related injury. A lot of workers think that any injury that happens on the road during work hours automatically makes the employer liable, but the law makes a clear distinction between work-related travel and activities that are not work-related.

Business travel usually includes trips for meetings, inspections, off-site assignments, supervision, deliveries, or any other trip that is a necessary part of the employee’s job. In these situations, the employer has a duty to make sure that the conditions and systems of travel are reasonably safe, which includes giving clear instructions and providing safe vehicles. The employer may be responsible if an accident happens because of a faulty system or equipment. However, the Employees’ Compensation Act 2010 protects the worker during a journey from and to work as long as the injury happened within the time frame.

It gets really interesting when a worker mixes work with personal tasks. Nigerian courts carefully look at how far the deviation goes. If you stop for a short time to get petrol or food, that’s a small change that could still be part of your job. But a big diversion could completely take the employee out of the protection of the employer.

Think about this situation, which is based on problems that often come up in Nigerian disputes: The regional sales manager in Lagos has to go from Ikeja to Ibadan to meet with a client. He gets a company car and has to tell the fleet supervisor about his trip. He gets a call from a friend on the Lagos-Ibadan Motorway asking him to pick up a package from a courier office that is ten minutes off his route. He agrees, picks up the package, and goes back to the highway. As he got closer to the Sagamu interchange, a tanker in front of him slid, making a lot of cars swerve. His company car hits a barrier while trying to avoid the crash, breaking multiple bones in the process.

When he files a claim for personal injury, the company’s insurance company first turns it down, saying that the diversion took him off the job. But the court might look at the situation in a more practical way. The deviation was small, he had returned to the approved route, and the main reason for the trip was still the business meeting in Ibadan. Nigerian courts usually say that these kinds of small, real-life detours don’t end the employment relationship, especially if the worker is back on track at the time of the accident. If the employer’s car was poorly maintained and made the crash worse, they may also be liable.

But not every case is in favour of the employee. In some cases, the law holds the worker fully responsible because the deviation completely breaks the employment relationship. A useful comparison is the following real-life example based on common patterns in the transportation and engineering industries.

A generator technician who lives in Port Harcourt works for a utilities company that keeps power units running for banks and factories. He is told to drive from Trans Amadi to Eleme to do a quick repair. The employer gives the worker a company van and clear directions to go straight to the site because the client has said there may be a safety issue. The technician decides to drive to a friend’s house in Rumuokoro instead of Eleme. This is more than thirty minutes in the opposite direction, and he is delivering a personal item. Now, on a different direction, he drives back towards Eleme after being there for almost an hour. He gets into an accident halfway through the trip when he tries to pass someone on a wet road without being careful. He gets hurt badly and tries to sue his employer.

In this case, the employer says they are not responsible, and the law will probably agree with them. The diversion was big, planned, long-lasting, and in the opposite direction from the work assignment. The worker wasn’t just stopping for a short time; he had actually given up on the work task to do his own thing. Even though he hurt himself trying to get back to work, the employment link is still broken because he went so far outside the allowed travel area. This is often seen by courts as a complete departure, which means that the worker is responsible for his injuries. If an employee uses the company’s car to run a personal errand that is important to them, they are responsible for any risks that come up. Personal injury protection usually doesn’t work.

This difference explains why work-travel cases are still very controversial. The line between a small change and a big change depends on the facts. When deciding a case, courts look at how long it took, how far it went, what the person meant to do, where they were going, and how much personal gain there was. Employees need to be careful not to turn work trips into personal trips, especially when they are using company vehicles or equipment. In the Port Harcourt case, the worker’s long and unrelated diversion broke the employment connection, leaving him legally vulnerable.

Also, it’s important to know that this legal framework often fits with insurance policies. Employer insurance usually covers business trips that are directly related to work, but not personal trips that aren’t authorised. Some policies have clear “no-deviation” clauses that say the coverage ends as soon as the employee goes off the authorised route. People who drive their own cars to work may have an even harder time because their personal insurance may not cover business use unless it is specifically stated.

Accidents that happen while travelling for work show how hard it is to find the right balance between what an employer is responsible for and how an employee behaves. Nigerian law protects workers well when the trip is really in the employer’s best interest or is closely related to the job. But it also sets clear boundaries when the employee’s personal choices are the most important part of the trip. Discipline is the safest way to go: stay on the authorised path, don’t take unnecessary detours, and ask your boss for clarification on instructions. These details decide who is responsible for the accident: the employer or the employee.

This article is meant for general understanding only and not a legal advice. If you believe you’ve suffered any harm or injury due to your fault and another person’s fault, and you are concerned about the viability of your case or high cost of  hiring a lawyer, you can reach out to an experienced personal injury lawyer who may be willing to offer a  legal advice and handle your case on a “NO WIN, NO FEE” arrangement, which simply means you only pay if you win and get compensation.

Michael ‘Lekan Odunlami, Esq. is a Lagos-based personal injury lawyer at Claybrook Attorneys. He can be contacted via [email protected]