A TICKLISH PROBLEM

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVIII, Issue 200, 7 August 1928, Page 5

A TICKLISH PROBLEM

LEiGAL OLAIM~FOLLOWS MURDER. COMPENSATION WANTED lOR LOSS OF SON. Sydney. July 26. Before the Workers’ Compensation Commission in Sydney there have been heard some unusual claims undei the Workers’ Compensation Act recently enacted in this State' but the most remarkable was commenced this week, when the father of a man who was snot dead at his place of employment, claimed compensiti ri from the employer of his son. The case is an extraordinary requel to the shooting of Carmel Caraci by Salvatore Scalisi, at St. Peters, in September, 1927. Both men were employed as .oojcutters by Cerrutti, Splitsead ,and Company. It was pointed out at the trial of Scalisi, who was a small and inoffensive man in appearance and general character, that Oaraci had been continually threatening his coun tryman for working overtime and thus earning more money. Scalisi’s evidence showed he had lived in deadly fear of Caraci and the upshot of the affair was that he shot Career dead at the works one morning following a further quarrel on the same subject. At the trial, Scalisi was found guilty of manslaughter—he did not deny anything—and was bound over to he of good behaviour for three years. In outlining the claim for compensation, counsel for plaintiff, Nicola Caraci, of Sicily, said that his client was the father of the dead man. and had been entirely dependent upon his son. He submitted that whatever quarrel took place was the result of the work in which both men were engaged. that the shooting took place at their place of employment, and that the claimant was therefore entitled to compensation from the employer of his son. For the respondents, however, counsel submitted that the murder was the result qf a personal quarrel in which the firm was in no way concerned or involved, and that the claimant was a foreigner, living in a foreign country, and therefore outside the jurisdiction of the Court before which the action was brought, or any British Court. The presiding judge ruled that there was a case to be heard, and evidence was entered upon, the whole facts of the quarrel and the shooting being gone into fully. Counsel addressed the Court and the judge subsequently reserved his decision. It is regarded in Sydney legal circles as a ticklish problem, and the final decision, whatever it is. is certain to raise considerable argument.