Supreme Court WATERSIDER’S CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CONTINUED

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28539, 19 March 1958, Page 15

Supreme Court WATERSIDER’S CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CONTINUED

The hearing of evidence and addresses by counsel in the action in which a former waterside worker is claiming damages for injuries to his knee, alleged to have resulted from being struck by a sling from a wharf crane working the steamer Karamu at Lyttelton on May 14, 1956, was concluded in the Supreme Court yesterday. Mr Justice Adams will sum up to the jury today. Special damages of £1531 16s 2d and general damages of £4500 are being claimed. The plaintiff, Douglas Oliver Lindsay, a 41-year-old garage attendant, is represented by Mr B. McClelland, with/ him Mr A. D. Holland. Counsel for the first defendant, the Union Steam Ship Company of New Zealand, Ltd., is Mr R. W. Edgley, and for the second defendant, the Lyttelton Harbour Board, Mr C. G. Penlington, with him Mr J. N. Matson.

Cross-examined by Mr McClelland, the crane driver, John Reginald Hoare Kissell, said the movement of the crane was the usual one. He did not see men leaving the ship; he had no idea work had ceased because of rain, as those in the cranes were never told. He did not lift Lindsay out of the hold with his crane; the driver could have been another.

He would not dare to drop a load withoqt a signal from the hatchman because of the danger to the men in the hold, said Kissell, and he was sure the hatchman was at the position he was in throughout the day. The witness, Wilson, was wrong in saying the hatchman was on the port side. On a ship like the Karamu, the hatchman had no need to go to the other side. He had never gone over a hold without stopping and steadying the load. On this occasion, he had stopped over the foc’sle head, swung the load over the hatch cover and lowered it into the hold. He needed no signal from the hatchman to stop over the foc’sle. but he had one to stop over the hatch and complied. Mr McClelland: But you did not mention stopping above the hatch when I asked several times about stopping the load? Is it not right that you did not stop between the foc’sle head and the hatch?— I did.

Why did you not mention it?— It happened two years ago. I stopped dead 20 feet above the hatch and waited for the hatchman’s signal. Orders Not Remembered

Do you remember the orders given?—l do not. He saw the men take evasive action and he could not understand why they should when the load came in in a normal manner, he said, questioned further by Mr McClelland. He denied saying: “Don’t you men know when to knock off?” It was weeks later before he heard that Lindsay’s injuries were serious and the details of the last sling had then gone from his mind. Mr Edgley: While you have been answering questions you have been looking over my shoulder at some person. Is he one of your superiors? —Yes. He could have seen the hatchman in whichever position he was in, said Kissell to Mr Edgley. Waterside workers and stevedores would “go off” if crane drivers made any remarks such as he was said to have made. The three men were wrong when they described the speed of the load as excessive; he was right. He did not stop before Lindsay was hit; he stopped when he was told by the hatchman. Mr Edgley: Yesterday you were vague but today you are positive about incidents such as stopping over the hatch. Have you been thinking about it overnight? —Yes. Mr Penlington: If you were instructed to slew this load into the forward part of the hatch, would you be able to see the Sling swining in? —I would not see the sling going into the corner. If it was swinging in too fast, would you be able to see that?— Yes, by the wire rope. Would you take a signal from the hatchman to correct that?— We would correct that ourselves Braking of Load

James Edward Carr, crane foreman for the Harbour Board, gave technical evidence on the operation of cranes. There was no time for a crane to accelerate in a distance of 20 to 30 feet, he said. The driver checked the drop of the load with the brake.

The foot brake would stop a dropping load in two feet, said witness to Mr McClelland. The emergency hand brake would be used only if the foot brake failed. There was no signal for an emergency stop. A ton would exceed

normal speed if the brake was released when the load was 20 feet in the air. Mr Edgley: When a shipping company hires a crane, it has no power to say how the crane should be worked mechanically? —No.

James Leslie Will, a consulting orthopaedic surgeon, said he had made six examinations of Lindsay’s knee and it was fair to presuppose that an arthritic condition would not develop. The weight-bearing mechanism in the joint was not interfered with; only the ligament at the back had been torn and was permanently damaged. To Mr McClelland: He agreed the injury was permanent and painful at times and prevented Lindsay from doing heavy labouring work. Counsel’s Addresses

“It is significant that the hatch driver has not been called by the shipping company, because his evidence would be important,” said Mr Penlington in his address to the jury. “He is the key man and could have told us what signals were given and how this accident took place.” The crane driver took his orders from the hatchman and if he was negligent he was at the time a servant of the shipping company. It was open to the jury to find the accident was nothing but a pure accident, without negligence. He contended that signals had been given, and which the driver had to obey, by a servant of the shipping company. Plaintiff had suffered a serious injury but the claim for damages was excessive. “Surely men working in a hold are entitled to have protection from tons of potatoes being dropped on them,” Mr McClelland said to the jury. “That is the simple question.” The allegations of contributory negligence and that the accident was inevitable had been abandoned. The plaintiff’s case was that the crane driver was negligent in the first place because the load came in far too fast, causing three men to take evasive action. Was the crane driver anxious to get away from work and was he annoyed because there was another load? Was it not a reasonable inference that the hatchman had not been called because he would not help the Union company’s case? That suggested there was something wrong in the actual control between the hatchman and the crane driver.

Whatever signal to stop the load was given was not complied with, said Mr McClelland. Why should the driver stop the load over the foc’s’le to take the swing of it and then again over the hold? It was obvious the load did not stop over the hold. If it was stopped in the centre,, how would it hit Lindsay in the far corner of the hatch? As an unskilled man, plaintiff could in future do only light labouring work. His financial loss was considerable and he would suffer pain and discomfort for the rest of his life. The amount claimed was little enough. “In spite of knowledge that there was one more load, three watersiders are thrown into a panic by the unexpected arrival of a sling, which, to all three, was travelling fast,” said Mr Edgley. “I suggest the sling came in without warning and far too fast and that it was impossible for anyone to give a warning and everybody had to duck for cover.” It would be foolish to expect the hatchman to have any time in which to give a warning. Kissell. he submitted, was not under the control of the Union company at the time. He was impatient to stop work, and displayed a lack of skill and operated the crane in a singularly inefficient manner on this occasion.

Food Poisoning Cases

. Two cases of food poisoning in a family at Rangiora are being investigated by the Health Department. These, and two cases of salmonellosis (a type of food poisoning), five cases of tuberculosis, two of puerperal sepsis and two of infective hepatitis in the Christchurch district were among the notifiable diseases reported to the District Health Office last week. Six cases of pemphigus neonatorum were reported from different hospitals during the week. One case of tuberculosis was reported from the Greymouth district. In the Christchurch district, there was one death from tuberculosis. and an 11-year-old boy died from complications after infective hepatitis.