COMPENSATION COURT OVERRULED

Evening Star, Issue 25470, 28 April 1945, Page 9

COMPENSATION COURT OVERRULED

LUMP SUM PAYMENT DOES HOT BAR DAMAGES SUIT (P.A.) WELLINGTON, April 27. According to a judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal to-day, the Compensation Court will, in future, have no jurisdiction to fix compensation on a motion by an employer, unless the employee concerned agrees.

The case arose as the result of an injury received by a waterside worker, John Logie, of Wellington, while working for the Union Steam Ship Company. The accident occurred on July 6, i 943, and Logie received £4 10s a week compensation. On August 28, 1944, the company filed a motion in the Compensation Court, Wellington, for an order terminating the weekly compensation or alternatively, fixing the compensation payable to the plaintiff, and in September the (plaintiff's solicitors wrote to the defendant company, making a claim for £1,550 general and special damages for alleged negligence at common law. When the motion was heard by the Compensation Court, counsel for the defendant contended that the award of a lump sum under the motion would bar the plaintiff from bringing a common law action, but Mr Justice O'Regan, following a previous decision of Mr Justice Callan as being in line with his own views, proceeded to fix lump sum compensation, although counsel for the defendant still affirmed his right to contend that the common law remedies of the plaintiff were toarred by the payment of a lump sum. The judge fixed the lump sum at £230 3s lOd and costs, and the amounts were duly paid by the defendant on September 12, of last year. A fortnight later the plaintiff's solicitors issued a writ in the Supreme Court claiming damages for negligence, and the defendant denied negligence and claimed also that the action was not "maintainable by reason of the pro-visions-of section 49 of the 'Workers' Compensation Act. | The Court of Appeal, delivering judgement to-day, decided that an action for damages is not barred by fixing compensation on an employer's motion and the case was returned to the Supreme Court to assess the damages on the ground -that the Compensation acted in excess of its jurisdiction in fixing compensation without the agreement of the ■ employee. There was no such agreement in this case as would authorise such an order as was made by the Compensation Court. The conclusion of the Court was reached because the Compensation Court acted without jurisdiction.