ARBITRATION COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 13176, 4 February 1909, Page 4

ARBITRATION COURT.

Second Dax.—-Thtosday. The Arbitration Court' (His Honor Mr Justice Sim and Messrs J; A. M'Cullough and S. Brown) resumed their Bitting at 10 a»m. to-day. John Wilson v. John Henry. Mervyn.— Appeal against the decision of a magistrate. Appellant ■was represented by Mr P. S. K. Macassey, and Mr J. R. Bartholomew appeared for the respondent.—Mr Macassey explained that the case was an appeal against the decision of Mr James WFEiniis, Stipendiary Magistrate at Blacks, given on I December 17, 1908, in an arbitration caso under the the Workers' Com-

pensation for Accidents Act, 1908, in which John Henry Mervyn claimed to recover from John Wilson £2OO as compensation for injury sustained by being frost-bitten whilst mow-raking on the appellant's farm at j Loader on July 11, 1908. Mervyn was employed by Wilson from November 11, j 1907. to July 11, 1908, as a farm laborer , on the sheep run of Wilson. Owing to a heavy fall of snow Wilson's sheep were snowed up, and on the morning of July 11 Mervyn and five others, including Wilson, left the homestead for the purpose of recovering the snowed-up sheep. The process adopted was to beat down the snow by tramping tracks, and then getting the . sheep out and running them down the tracks. The work is known as snowraking. During the day Mervyn's feet bocame very cold, and he lost feeling in them. On his return to his hut on that day it ■ was ascertained that his feet and ankles were severely frost-bitten. Wilson treated Mervyn to the best of his ability, but owing to the depth of snow on the ground it was impossible to remove Mervyn to Ophir for medical treatment until July 16. When- treated by a medical man it was found that the feet and ankles of Mervyn were swollen and discolored, tho tissues damaged, and mortification starting. Mervyn was unable to rise from his bed for two months, and he is f*iU incapacitated from work, although under medical treatment mortification had been arrested. During the hearing of tho action at Blacks counsel for Wilson contended that the injury—viz., the frost-bite—was not an accident within the meaning of the Workers' Compensation Act. The magistiate, however, decided that the injury sustained was an accident, and awarded £l5O as compensation. Mr Macaasey further explained that the question for the opinion of the Court was: Whether or not the judgment of the magistrate was erroneous in point of law. After quoting several legal authorities counsel held that the injury sustained by Mervyn was not an accident, but wa6 a disease, which, be contended, was not covered by the Act. Tho element of accident was altogetlier absent. Mervyn had deliberately gone away into the snow, | knowing the risk he was taking.—Mr Bartholomew contended that the injury sustained by Mervyn was distinctly an accident, but even if it were regarded as a disease, it was a disease covered by the Act, insomuch as it arose out of or in tho course of his employment. If Mervyn liad .» : ed tho verdict concerning his death must have been accident ot suicide. It would have been deemed an accident, of course. He submitted that any disease that was not homoeopathic, but which was brought about by causes arising out of a man's employment, was an accident.—After further argument the Court intimated that they would take time to consider the matter. Tlie Court then adjourned till 2.30. Thomas Chrietie v. Arthur Garwood.— Claim for compensation. Respondent was represented by Mr S. Solomon, K.C., and Mr F. Stilling; claimant was not represented. The statement of claim set forth

that claimant was on May 6 last at Allanton engaged in driving a traction engine, being then in the employment of Curwood. Claimant was oiling the" engine, when his hand was caught in the wheel, with the result that it was badly crushed. He lost two fingers, and the remaining fingers were partially disabled. He claimed £2 per week from Mav 6 to August 27., 1908, and 30s per week after that date.—Before the Court resumed in the afternoon claimant filed a ctiscontinuance of claim. _ Mr Solomon explained that the case involved a question of considerable importance, inasmuch as it was sought to know whether the claimant was a contractor or a workman. Claimant had endeavored to effect a settlement with counsel, who were unable to meet him in the matter. Claimant, ehortlv before the case was called, had in- ! formed connsel that ho had abandoned his claim. Counsel presumed that it was within His Honor's discretion, as in the Supreme Court, to allow costs to respondent. Claimant was a fanner at Allanton, and was eaid to be a man of considerable means. The claim was filed in September last, and claimant had had ample time in which to effect a eattlemenfc without recourse to the Court. ]f claimant had not intended to go on with his case ho had months to make up his mind. Considerable expense had boon incurred, and counsel considered that it was only fair that costs be allowed. —The Court allowed costs (soven guineas), with witnesses' expenses, disbursements to be fixed by the Clerk of Awards. The 'Court at 2.50 p.m. ndjourncd until to-morrow at 10 a.m.