FARM LABOURER'S INJURIES.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20273, 26 June 1931, Page 8

FARM LABOURER'S INJURIES.

CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION. A claim for compensation under the Workers' Compensation Act, 1922, was heard in the Arbitration Court yesterday when James Itait Martin, a farm labourer (Dr. A. L. Haslam) sued A. Steven and Co., Ltd., farmers, of View Hill, Oxford (Mr J. I> Hutchison) for general compensation under the Act for injuries suffered in the course of his employment. On the bench were Mr Justice Frazer, Mr W: Cecil Prime (employers' representative) and Mr A. li. Monteith (employees' representative). Plaintiff alleged that while attending to a foal on the station on February 20th, 1930, he bad been so injured aa to be totally incapacitated and had begun to suffer- fropi angina pectoris. Ho claimed compensation. The defence, while admitting liability for a period of two years, denied that total incapacity had been suffered by plaintiff. i Dr. Haslam said that, when plaintiff was injured by being pushed against a fence by a foal that] he was drenching, he was already suffering from some form of The point at issue was the length of time by which the progress of the disease had been accelerated. Dr. Robert Hectoi - Baxter saidthat he had examined plaintiff since the accident and had found that be was suffering from heart > trouble and had obviously been so suffering for some _ time. In bis opinion plaintiff had been suffering from incipient angina pectoris before tbo strain and' the strain bad, produced definite symptoms and had accelerated the course of the disease. He thought that, had no strain been inflicted, plaintiff might I have.gone on with ordinary farm work suited to a man of his years, but a j similar strain might have occurred at! any time. He might have gone on doing light work for perhaps three , years. Witness told Mr Hutchison that, if plaintiff tad been able to avoid incurring a strain, he might have gone on working for a maximum period of three years. Dr. Malcolm Gray agreed with Dr. Baxter's opinions, but held that the disease had only been antedated by about twelve months." Considering the thickening of the arteries that had taken place, he doubted if the disease could have progressed to a greater extent as a result of the strain. Dr. C. Hi. Gould agreed entirely with Dr. Gray's evidence. He would not have been surprised, considering the hardening of tne arteries and the dilatation of the heart that had taken place, to find plaintiff suffering from angina pectoris without ever having undergone a strain. He felt that any estimate" of the time by which the disease had been anticipated would be pure guesswork. "It appears to nie that this would he a typical case for a medical referee," said his Honour. ' "There has been so much medical evidence that the Court has been get a' sort of puzzle, more because we know all these doctors and havie a great respect for them. This is not" really a case for a lav Court and there is absolutely no legal point involved It should hare cone before a medical referee." " After a short retirement his Honour said: "It is a case which ,must be decided on the opinions of medical witnesses, for all of whom we have rf ereat respect. We appreciate the fact that all the estimates are largely guesswork. common ground

that a breakdown was inevitable—at most within three years—and it is.common ground that angina is caused or accelerated by a strain. Dr. Gray says the collapse would have oocurred in twelve months, and to be generous allows a possible maximum of two years—-Dr. Gould agrees generally, but says he would not nave been surprised if the collapse had come at any tune, and Dr. Baxter takes a longer view and allows threfc years. "Upon analysis we 6nd tfcat there is not, after -all much difference between the three estimates, because Dr. Baxter seems to base his opinion on the plaintiff's doing no work at all, while the other two witnesses allowed him to 40 on doing normal work. \Vfe have come to the conclusion that defendant's offer of two years' full comEensation waa reasonable and should ave been accepted, and we therefore give judgment for full compensation, for _ two years . from the date -of the accident, loss costs."