Judicial Dilution Of ‘Course Of Employment’: A Critique Of Expanding Liability Under The Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923
- IJLLR Journal
- Apr 9
- 1 min read
Sritrisha S, BBA LLB (Hons.), School of Excellence in Law, TNDALU
ABSTRACT
The phrase “arising out of and in the course of employment” forms the cornerstone of liability under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923. Originally intended to impose liability on employers only where a clear causal and contextual nexus exists between employment and injury, judicial interpretation over time has significantly broadened its scope. Courts, guided by the beneficial nature of the legislation, have increasingly adopted liberal doctrines such as notional extension and purposive interpretation to extend protection to employees even beyond the physical and temporal boundaries of the workplace.
This paper critically examines whether such judicial expansion has led to a dilution of the statutory requirement of “course of employment,” thereby unsettling the balance between employer liability and employee protection. Through a doctrinal analysis of landmark judicial pronouncements, the study explores the extent to which courts have stretched the concept to include commuting accidents, injuries during breaks, and incidents occurring in spaces indirectly connected to employment. The research argues that while such expansion promotes social justice, it also introduces doctrinal ambiguity and imposes disproportionate burdens on employers.
The paper ultimately evaluates whether this trend reflects a necessary evolution of welfare jurisprudence or an overreach that calls for judicial restraint and legislative clarification.
Keywords: Course of employment, judicial dilution, employers, employees, liability, causation, compensation.
