A landmark ruling means that employees who travel for work are entitled to be paid for ‘home comforts’ while away and should not suffer ‘deprivation’ through ‘inadequate facilities’.
The case was brought by Dick Richards, 55, a travelling salesman who was away from home for six months of the year.
He submitted an expenses claim for ‘home comforts’ which turned out to be payment to a woman for services rendered. His company rejected the expense.
The company lodged an appeal but the appeal court ruled that if Mr Richards enjoyed a good sex life at home, the company was obligated to allow for same while away.
To that end, Mr Richards produced his wife Clara, 41, who testified that their sex life was “tolerable” and “unexciting”.
The court ruled, therefore, that the company was obliged to pay only half of the rather large expenses claim.
A company spokesperson said: “It’s a reasonable outcome and with his pending divorce Dick won’t be submitting any similar claims for a while.
“He also tendered his resignation. We heard he’s standing for parliament.”
What’s the best expenses fiddle you have claimed? Answers from politicians particularly welcome
How much did sex cost you last time?
Leave a Comment below