£680 COMPENSATION

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXVI, Issue 148, 8 June 1936, Page 6

£680 COMPENSATION

Judgment Given to Tailor in Napier Claim INJURED IN COLLISION Judgment for plaintiff in an action taken by Kevin Renier O'Hallaivn, of Napier, tailor’s cutter, against the House of Stevens, Ltd., of Dannevirki for compensation for injuries received in an accident in April, 1935, has been awarded in the Arbitration Court by Mr. Justice Page. The amount of the judgment is £6BO 4/6, with £lO 10/costs. The action was heard in Napier last (south, when Mr. A. E. Lawry appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. W. Perry, of Wellington, for the defendant company, which is in liquidation. Tho plaintiff was engaged from October 23 to December 31, 1934, to organise the tailoring and cutting departments of the business, which tfio defendant contemplated extending by the opening-up ot several branches. Tho period of plaintiff'* engagement was extended by another six mouths from the following January 14. In April, 1935, the plaintiff journeyed to his homo in Napier, with the consent of defendant, to spend his holidays there. He was instructed to i|l on his way back at Norsewood to fit a customer. When nearing Hastings plaintiff’s car came into collision with another car, and ho suffered injury to his left leg, ankle and foot. QUESTION OF EARNINGS. Defendant’s counsel maintained that plaintiff was not a worker within th© meaning of the Workers Compensation Act, 1922, in that the Act does not include “any person employed otherwise than by manual labour whose remuneration exceeds £460 a year.” The question to be decided was whether or not plaintiff’s remuneration was £4OO a year or more. The rate of remuneration, £8 8/- a week, would have exceeded £4OO a year if calculated over the whole period of a year, and the plaintiff would have beep outside the Act.

The only evidence on the point was that of the plaintiff, who stated that he did not intend to continue bis work for long. He said that the business was a cheap business, and that his reputation as a high-class cutter might be affected, and that if he had been offered a further term ho would not have taken it. The evidence had shown that the defendant firm went into liquidation on July 1, 1935, a fortnight before tho expiry of the term for which the plaintiff had been engaged. ' It could not therefore be held that a further engagement would have been entered into. EXCEPTIONAL QUALIFICATIONS. Dealing with the defendant’s contention tlrat plaintiff, by his manner of driving, hgd introduced a risk not incidental to his employment, the Court held that even assuming that plaintiff was guilty of negligence in driving at too high a speed, such negligence did not disentitle him to recover. “His duty,” says the judgment, “was to drive the car from Napier to Norsawood, and in view of the principles laid down in the authorities, we do not think that his driving of the car in tho manner described takes the case out of the statute.” A certificate signed by a medical adviser on either side expressed tho opinion that the plaintiff was totally incapacitated for his present occupation, and was likely to remain so. He was a man of exceptional qualifications as a tailor and cutter, and qsed to contribute technical articles to it number of fashion journals. He stated that on closing his shop his intention was to devote himself to writing. His loss of earning power for the future should be estimated at £3 a week, and compensation would be commuted accordingly to the date of the hearing.