Is it a work-related injury to die in a car accident on the way without taking leave for personal matters? 

Xu (female) is the workshop director of a company in Jiangsu, and her direct leader is Hong, the vice president of production. Xu's working hours are usually from 8:00 to 17:00, and his home address is a residential area in the Economic Development Zone, and his children's grandfather's home address is Dingyan Street.

The company has a Leave System Description for employees' leave. According to this description, employees must fill in leave slips and go to leaders at all levels for approval before taking leave.

At 14: 59 on July 2, 2024, Xu received a notice from WeChat that "a meeting will be held together today, and the time will wait for Li Mouyi", and Xu replied "going home to get a child".

At about 16: 00 on the same day, after Pan, the workshop director of the 230 workshop in the same office, said that he would send a swimsuit to his daughter, he left the company to go to his grandfather's house without asking for leave. After Xu met his grandfather at the intersection, he drove an electric bicycle back to the company. A traffic accident occurred and Xu died on the spot.

According to Hong, the direct leader of Xu, before the meeting broke up at 17: 14 on July 2, 2024, he went to the workshop where Xu and Pan were located and asked about Xu's whereabouts. Pan told Xu to send a swimsuit to his daughter, but Hong did not receive Xu's application for leave.

On July 29, 2024, the traffic police issued the "Confirmation of Road Traffic Accidents", which determined that Xu was responsible for the accident.

On September 5, 2024, family members filed an application for work-related injury identification.

After investigation and evidence collection, the People's Social Security Bureau made a decision not to recognize a work-related injury on November 8, 2024, stating that Xu's application for work-related injury recognition did not meet the conditions of recognizing a work-related injury or treating it as a work-related injury in Articles 14 and 15 of the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance, and now it is decided not to recognize or treat it as a work-related injury.

The family members refused to accept the decision and filed an administrative lawsuit with the court, requesting to revoke the decision of the People's Social Security Bureau not to recognize the work-related injury and make a new recognition.

Judgment of first instance:

The behavior of returning to work without going through the formalities of asking for leave before going out does not belong to the normal category of work

The court of first instance held that the focus of the dispute in this case was whether Xu's traffic accident was on his way to and from work.

According to Item 6 of Article 14 of the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance, a person who is injured by a traffic accident or an urban rail transit, passenger ferry or train accident for which he is not primarily responsible on his way to and from work belongs to a situation that should be recognized as a work-related injury.

According to the second paragraph of Article 6 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Administrative Cases of Work-related Injury Insurance, a person who travels to and from his/her workplace and his/her spouse, parents and children's place of residence within a reasonable time can be regarded as on his/her way to and from work.

Therefore, for the judgment of "on the way to and from work" identified by work-related injuries, in addition to considering whether employees are on the reasonable way to and from work, it is also necessary to make a comprehensive judgment with reference to the factors of reasonable time to and from work: employees normally commute to and from work or commute with the permission of the unit, and the commuting time is closely related to working hours, so as to meet the time requirements on the way to and from work.

In this case, Xu went out for personal reasons during working hours and went to his father-in-law's residence. Before going out, he did not go through the leave formalities according to a company system. His behavior of returning to work did not belong to the normal scope of work and did not meet the time requirements on his way to work. The traffic accident that he was not mainly responsible for did not belong to the situation that should be recognized as a work-related injury.

In summary, the first-instance judgment rejected the family's claim.

Appeal:

Going out is a bathing suit for my daughter, and it is also an objective situation needed in daily life.

Family refuses to accept the appeal, facts and reasons:

1. The first-instance judgment denied the nature of "on the way to work" on the grounds that Xu was going out for private affairs, ignoring the objective situation that Xu was going out to give his daughter a swimsuit and was also needed in daily life.

2. The Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance does not take the internal leave formalities of the performance unit as a prerequisite for the identification of work-related injuries.

3. Xu returned to the unit immediately after going out to send a swimsuit, which is continuous in time and meets the reasonable time standard.

Judgment of second instance:

It is not appropriate to expand the interpretation or extend the understanding of the provisions on the determination of work-related injuries on the way to and from work.

We believe that the judgment of the first instance is correct and should be upheld. The reasons are as follows:

On the way to and from work, it is based on the principles of social public interests and fairness and justice. It is an extension of the identification of work-related injuries as work-related injuries, and it is a kind of oblique protection for employees. This should be strictly implemented in accordance with the law, and it is not appropriate to expand the explanation or extend the understanding.

Regarding the assurance of workers' commuting time in the identification of work-related injuries, Article 6 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Administrative Cases of Work-related Injury Insurance has made detailed requirements. Among them, the first item is clearly defined as a reasonable route to and from work and residence, regular residence and unit dormitory within a reasonable time.

In this case, Xu went out for personal reasons during working hours, and his return to work did not belong to the normal scope of work, which did not meet the time requirements on his way to work. The traffic accident that he was not mainly responsible for did not belong to the situation that should be recognized as a work-related injury.

To sum up, the court of second instance ruled on November 17, 2025 as follows: dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment.

CaseNo.: (2025) No.358, the end of Su 04 line.

Xiaobian comments:

Recently, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security issued opinions (III) on several issues concerning the implementation of the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance. Article 7 of the opinions stipulates that a reasonable route for employees to commute between their work units and their places of residence within a reasonable time is on the way to and from work.

Including:

(1) On the way to and from work and residence, habitual residence and dormitory in a reasonable time;

(2) On the way to and from work and the reasonable route of spouse, parents and children's residence within a reasonable time;

(3) Engaged in activities required by daily work and life, and on the way to and from work at a reasonable time and route;

(4) Others are on their way to and from work at a reasonable time and route.

The determination of reasonable time and route should be combined with the periodicity and relative fixity of daily commuting, but it does not include the round-trip time and route for personal activities or private affairs, such as vacations.

Xu sent a swimsuit to his children during working hours, which obviously belongs to the opinion of "carrying out personal activities or handling private affairs". His round-trip time and route are not on the way to and from work, and the judgment made by the court is in line with the current policy.