ARBITRATION COURT

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 28, 1 August 1929, Page 8

ARBITRATION COURT

"CUTTING STANDING TIMBER"

WHAT IS DOMESTIC SERVICE?

The. Arbitration Court yesterday heard a claim for compensation by Mary Gough, of Lower Hutt, widow of the late Richard Thomas Gough, general labourer and domestic servant, against George Albert Chapman, Lower Hutt retired manufacturer.

In the statement of claim the plain tiff said that her late husband, Richard T. Gough, was at the time of his death, and had been for a period of five years prior thereto, in the continuous employment of the defendant his wages being £4 10s per week. On the 11th of May, 1929, Gough, when engaged in cutting a lime tree pn the grounds of the defendant's residence tell from a ladder and sustained injury resulting in his death on tho evening of the same day. Tho plaintiff claimed compensation under the Workers' Compensation Act, the amount claimed being £936, or 208 times the average weekly earnings of her late husband; also medical and other expenses, and costs.

The defeneo was a denial that the late Mr. Gough was engaged in cutting standing timber, nor was he a domestic servant, but it was admitted that he died as the result of a fall from a ladder.

Mr. E. P. Bunny, who appeared for the plaintiff, said that Mr. Chapman was only a nominal defendant. The main circumstances were not in dispute, but thero did arise the legal point whether this caso came under the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act. So far as he knew, only tWo cases of a similar nature had conic before the Courts in New Zealand. The point in question was whether Gough was engaged in domestic service. In addition to doing gardening, Gough, did all sorts of odd jobs about the-promises. Gough was described as engaged in domestic service in the insurance policy, although his main duties wero gardening.. Mr. C. A. L. Treadwell, who appeared for (ho defendant, submitted that the main question which the Court had to decide was: What, was Gough's substantial employment? Ho urged that the lopping off of a branch from an ornamental tree did not come within the definition of "cutting standing timber.". Neither dirt Cough's work come under the definition of "domestic ser•vico." The President (Mr. Justice Blair) pointed out that the words of the Act were "arising out of and in the course of his employment." Assuming that Gough for a third of his time was employed in .domestic service, at the time of the accident he was doing work as a gardener. Mr. Treadwell contended that the question the Court had to decide was whether Gough was engaged in employment which came under the first schedule of tho Act. Tho plaintiff had to prove that Gough was a domestic servant or was engiiged- in doing domestic service. The Court reserved judgment. A LABOURER'S CLAIM. Judgment was given by the Court in Uio caso Albert Ayling, labourer against the Wellington City Council, fr. claim for compensation for .injuries received by the plaintiff whilo 'working at Ngaio shovelling earth and stones into a truck. Tho Court said the question arose as to whether the plaintiff had proved that tho hernia, from which ho had suffered, and which admittedly niight have happened at any moment did happen as the result of the• pliysiological condition sot up by his work on the day of tho injury. "We have these facts admitted," said his Honour, "that the plaintiff had a lump in his groin before; that he had always had a swelling thorc, but not so big as after the day.mentioned in tho claim; that the hernia was reducible quite easily and finally' that in his evidence of the alleged accident he makes no mention of feeling the pain of the hernia, mo only medical evidenco called by the plaintiff carries tho matter no further than that his condition was consistent either- with a recent or with an old lierina.' Under the circumstances and m view of the medical testimony, the Court came to tho conclusion that the plaintiff had not established his claim J.he claim was dismissed.