I just had to include this in my blog. It's an interesting case.
I totally sympathised with the victim here. She was raped while on working assignment in another country. And hence she sued the company for compensation.
But frankly, can the company be liable if a business client rape the staff, especially if the rapist has no prior criminal record? Can the staff blame the company for not providing enough protection for the staff on a daily basis?
Realistically, this is not possible. One cannot just expect the employers to be responsible for daily events while working on assignment in another country.
The staff himself or herself has to take the necessary protection while there. If he or she feels that the place is not safe enough, request the company send over another staff or send more than one staff per assignments. But that may not always be financially feasible.
Well, given her resentment against the company, I think the lady who sued is no longer with the company.
------------------------
New Paper
24 Aug 2008
Woman sues employer over alleged rape on work trip. Judge says:
Employer can't be held responsible for everything
The business development manager claimed she was raped while on a working trip to Taiwan.
WOMAN SAYS
Employer knew of danger
The business development manager claimed she was raped while on a working trip to Taiwan. Holding her employer liable for what happened, she sued the company for compensation early this year, a few months after returning to Singapore.
No one was prosecuted and both parties were not named in court documents to protect the woman's identity.
In her statement of claim, filed early this year, the woman said she had been in Taiwan to inspect suitable sites for hotel development when she was allegedly raped on 1 Aug last year.
The assault is said to have occurred after one of her employer's business associates lured her to a remote tourist site in Yilan in north-eastern Taiwan.
She alleged that:
# Her employer had breached its employment contract by failing to take 'all necessary steps to safeguard her well being'.
# The rape, 'committed by a business associate of her employer, was a danger the employer knew or ought to have known about in the given circumstances'.
# Her employer had breached its duty of care to her by placing her in a 'vulnerable position' as to suffer the assault in the course of her work.
She also made a claim against her employer for failing to pay her CPF contributions and telephone expenses of more than $2,000.
EMPLOYER SAYS
We took enough care
In its defence, her employer said it had taken 'every reasonable step' in ensuring her safety, given her experience in working abroad. The woman had worked for some three years in Dubai before the incident.
The company pointed out that Taiwan was a relatively safe country and it had arranged 'safe and good' accommodation for her there.
She was also given clear instructions on her assignment. Hence, the company asserted that it could not anticipate that someone she was assigned to work with would 'lure or entice' her to a remote tourist site and then sexually assault her.
As for the CPF contributions and telephone expenses, the company insisted that these had been paid.
Arguing that the woman's case was unsustainable, the company's lawyer, Mr Darrell Low of Drew & Napier LLC, applied for the suit to be struck out.
A few months after the suit was filed, a deputy registrar in the Subordinate Courts allowed the company's application.
The woman appealed and in June the case went before District Judge Leslie Chew, who upheld the earlier decision.
JUDGE SAYS
Be realistic
In his written judgment, Judge Chew pointed out that it would be unrealistic to expect employers to be responsible for daily events in a foreign country.
He also noted that the standard of care in such situations was not for the employer to anticipate and guard against every conceivable scenario, but rather to take reasonable precautions for its staff's safety.
It would be a different story, wrote Judge Chew, if the company knew that the particular business associate was a sex offender and had attacked its staff on previous occasions.
But the woman did not include this among her claims in the suit.
While the woman's lawyer, Mr Renganathan Shanker of Gabriel Law Corporation, argued that the company could have hired a driver who would also double up as a bodyguard, Judge Chew said that such a measure was unrealistic.
Hiring a bodyguard or even a driver acting as one would be well beyond the reasonable expectation of businesses which regularly send employees overseas.
The costs and expenses of such a measure would also put an unnecessary burden on businesses hoping to spread their wings overseas.
As for the telephone expenses and CPF contributions, the judge felt these had already been paid.
He noted that the woman had neither explained the basis of her claim nor challenged her employer's assertion that the money had been paid. -- REPORTS BY CRYSTAL CHAN
I totally sympathised with the victim here. She was raped while on working assignment in another country. And hence she sued the company for compensation.
But frankly, can the company be liable if a business client rape the staff, especially if the rapist has no prior criminal record? Can the staff blame the company for not providing enough protection for the staff on a daily basis?
Realistically, this is not possible. One cannot just expect the employers to be responsible for daily events while working on assignment in another country.
The staff himself or herself has to take the necessary protection while there. If he or she feels that the place is not safe enough, request the company send over another staff or send more than one staff per assignments. But that may not always be financially feasible.
Well, given her resentment against the company, I think the lady who sued is no longer with the company.
------------------------
New Paper
24 Aug 2008
Woman sues employer over alleged rape on work trip. Judge says:
Employer can't be held responsible for everything
The business development manager claimed she was raped while on a working trip to Taiwan.
WOMAN SAYS
Employer knew of danger
The business development manager claimed she was raped while on a working trip to Taiwan. Holding her employer liable for what happened, she sued the company for compensation early this year, a few months after returning to Singapore.
No one was prosecuted and both parties were not named in court documents to protect the woman's identity.
In her statement of claim, filed early this year, the woman said she had been in Taiwan to inspect suitable sites for hotel development when she was allegedly raped on 1 Aug last year.
The assault is said to have occurred after one of her employer's business associates lured her to a remote tourist site in Yilan in north-eastern Taiwan.
She alleged that:
# Her employer had breached its employment contract by failing to take 'all necessary steps to safeguard her well being'.
# The rape, 'committed by a business associate of her employer, was a danger the employer knew or ought to have known about in the given circumstances'.
# Her employer had breached its duty of care to her by placing her in a 'vulnerable position' as to suffer the assault in the course of her work.
She also made a claim against her employer for failing to pay her CPF contributions and telephone expenses of more than $2,000.
EMPLOYER SAYS
We took enough care
In its defence, her employer said it had taken 'every reasonable step' in ensuring her safety, given her experience in working abroad. The woman had worked for some three years in Dubai before the incident.
The company pointed out that Taiwan was a relatively safe country and it had arranged 'safe and good' accommodation for her there.
She was also given clear instructions on her assignment. Hence, the company asserted that it could not anticipate that someone she was assigned to work with would 'lure or entice' her to a remote tourist site and then sexually assault her.
As for the CPF contributions and telephone expenses, the company insisted that these had been paid.
Arguing that the woman's case was unsustainable, the company's lawyer, Mr Darrell Low of Drew & Napier LLC, applied for the suit to be struck out.
A few months after the suit was filed, a deputy registrar in the Subordinate Courts allowed the company's application.
The woman appealed and in June the case went before District Judge Leslie Chew, who upheld the earlier decision.
JUDGE SAYS
Be realistic
In his written judgment, Judge Chew pointed out that it would be unrealistic to expect employers to be responsible for daily events in a foreign country.
He also noted that the standard of care in such situations was not for the employer to anticipate and guard against every conceivable scenario, but rather to take reasonable precautions for its staff's safety.
It would be a different story, wrote Judge Chew, if the company knew that the particular business associate was a sex offender and had attacked its staff on previous occasions.
But the woman did not include this among her claims in the suit.
While the woman's lawyer, Mr Renganathan Shanker of Gabriel Law Corporation, argued that the company could have hired a driver who would also double up as a bodyguard, Judge Chew said that such a measure was unrealistic.
Hiring a bodyguard or even a driver acting as one would be well beyond the reasonable expectation of businesses which regularly send employees overseas.
The costs and expenses of such a measure would also put an unnecessary burden on businesses hoping to spread their wings overseas.
As for the telephone expenses and CPF contributions, the judge felt these had already been paid.
He noted that the woman had neither explained the basis of her claim nor challenged her employer's assertion that the money had been paid. -- REPORTS BY CRYSTAL CHAN
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment