Ha, a good question which will no doubt solicit a number of different responses.

Common sense tells me this is not a RIDDOR because it's not a work related activity and people were undertaking this activity of their own volition. Now it could be argued that because the event was organised by the employer in work time it is a work related activity. So, my next question is whether the HSE would be interested in this type of injury - the answer is no.

It was an away day - work time. I presume they had no option to attend but did have an option to partake. This is work - ie the employer has decided what tasks the employee should do and will pay them to do it. The minutiae of were they on a frolic does not apply here in my opinion.

There is a bigger issue - who should report? The events company (yes) and / or the visiting employer (possibly check that it has been reported as duplication is not required. We also have the question of accident books and investigations etc.

As Jay says - had it been on the social noticeboard 'who wants to go joyriding...' different story.

Well I think it is reportable as it happened in company time and was organised by the company etc etc. The point about it being a local government responsibility is a red herring. ALL RIDDORS need to be reported on the HSE system; they pass on the details to the relevant local authority if it is within their jurisdiction. The issue of whether it turns up in your accident stats is down to you. Collecting RIDDOR stats is not a statutory responsibility, it is usually done to comply with some benchmarking scheme. Reporting a RIDDOR (this has been said before on this forum and I’ll say it again) is NOT an admission of liability or corporate failure. This case if the LA investigate, they will most likely go after the company organisation the event.
Finally are the HSE interested in this sort of accident: probably not, in fact they are probably not really interested in any accidents their main concern is one of simply of surviving on a reduced budget under government that does not really care.

the way the work was carried out
any machinery, plant, substances or equipment used for the work or
the condition of the site or premises where the accident happened

Does not just apply to a factory setting let’s say. In this case it could also apply to how the event with go-karts was organized including the sort and level of training that the participants had, the state of the karts, and the state of the track where the event took place. So yes RIDDOR might apply. The principle duty to report the incident would be down to the company organising the event but participants’ employers should also report it.

Playing Devil's Advocate, how do you know there were 'no failures in your [employer] systems'. What level of training was provided before the person was allowed to use the go-kart? Were they assessed as competent - for example, was an eye test undertaken?

Not reportable from the employers perspective - however from the entertainment company's - did this result in the IP being taken directly to hospital from the premises?

I would suggest, RIDDOR by the go-karting team.

Away day in my opinion is just that, a day away from work, although this can be argued that its in work time, its not an accident at work.

Mike,

Reputable and established go karting company(I assume they were)?

Perhaps therein lies what else could/should be checked?

Interesting topic - wonder who the injured party might seek recompense - not that there may be a case here at all.

It's got to be the Go Karting company, just because the event was organised by the company, and he was on pay he would of still been a member of the public in the true sense at the go karting and he went straight to hospital.

I know in other sporting pursuits the courts are reluctant to hold others responsible for sporting injuries based on the volenti principle. Ok it could be argued it was a work-related activity, however they would still have to prove negligence either by the employer or go-kart company.