PAINTER'S APPLICATION.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9490, 2 January 1919, Page 8

PAINTER'S APPLICATION.

An interesting 1 point was considered in Auckland last week by Mr. Justice Stringer in the case of William J. Powell v. the Crown. Up to August, 1917, the plaintiff was employed as a painter by the Railway Department ut £3 15s a week. He contracted lead ipoisoning and received compensation up to January 9, by which time he had recovered. He refused to accept defendant's offer to re^employ him as a painter, having decided to abandon the occupation of a painter, owing to the risk of again contracting lead poisoning. He had been working as a storeman, but had not been able to earn as much as he had received as a painter, and he claimed compensation amounting to one-half of the difference between his average earnings before his sickness, and the amount he was now earning. The Court held that the plaintiff had not proved increased susceptibility to the disease as a result ol the attack. The fact that the plaintiff, quite reasonably from motives of prudence, refused to return to the painting trade could not be made a basis of compensation under the Act. As, However, _there might be effects of lead poisoning upon some of the vital organs, which might remain lat^ ent in the system for a long time, and only manifest themselves as the result of some exciting cause, the plaitiff was entitled to have his rights prison, edin the event of such a contingency arising. The Court^ therefore, made an order for the payment of one penny per week until this Bum was ended, in^ creased or commuted. No order as to costs was made.