Plumber gets $11,000

Press, 17 November 1976, Page 2

Plumber gets $11,000

A young man was, awarded damages of more -than $ll,OOO by a jury in [the Supreme Court at I Christchurch yesterday for I injuries suffered when he .jumped off a house roof • after an explosion in an acetylene gas bottle he had been using while soldering lead flashing. Mr Justice Roper entered judgment of $11,243.95 for William Scott Hindmarsh, aged 21, a plumber, against Willcox Plumbing, Ltd, which denied negligence. The jury took more than three hours to reach its verdict.

Mr Hindmarsh claimed general damages of $20,000 from Willcox Plumbing, first defendant, and New Zealand Industrial Gases, Ltd, second defendant. : Messrs A. D. Holland and P. F. Whiteside appeared for Mr Hindmarsh, Mr I. J. D. Hall for Willcox Plumbing, and Mr C. B. Atkinson for New Zealand Industrial Gases- The latter firm was dismissed from the action after his Honour ruled that

there was no evidence to support allegations against

Mr Whiteside said that on September 14, 1973, Mr Hindmarsh was an apprentice plumber, aged 18, employed by Willcox Plumbing. On that day he was soldering lead flashing on to the roof of a house in Chester Street West, when the accident happened. Flame started coming out of the top of an acetylene bottle which had been supplied by New Zealand Industrial Gases. Mr Hindmarsh turned off the gas and stood back, expecting the. flame to burn itself out. Instead, there was a sudden loud explosion, and he jumped off the roof, suffering a crush fracture of the* right heel. .

It was subsequently discovered that the explosion had been caused by a safetyvalve in the cylinder head exploding to release the gas, said Mr Whiteside.

The jury found that Wilicox Plumbing was negligent in requiring Mr Hindmarsh to use an acetylene cylinder

without a regulator, in failing to instruct him in the use of the cylinder, and in failing to ensure that it was safe. Mr Hindmarsh was; awarded general damages of $12,500 and special damages of $133.65, which were not disputed. The jury found that. Mr Hindmarsh contributed to; his injuries by allowing the! flame from the handpiece to play on or near the top of! the cylinder, and assessed; | his responsibility for the. ac-i cident at 11 per cent, reduc-' ing the amount of damages.