SIGHT OF EYE LOST

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21589, 6 September 1933, Page 15

SIGHT OF EYE LOST

ACCIDENT IN QUARRY COMPENSATION CLAIM FAILS ACTION TOO LONG DELAYED A quarry labourer from Tokatoka. ticur Dargaville, Thomas Ringrose. wade claim in the Arbitration Court yesterday for £ooo damages for injury alleged to have been done to his right eye. In March of last year, plaintiff ■was employed at the Greenhill quarrv. Tc Kopuru. by Albert Mark Sanford. contractor, of Te Kopuru, from whom he sought to recover damages. Mr. Tuck appeared for plaintiff and Mr. JMercdith for defendant. Plaintiff claimed that while working jn the quarry, his eve was struck with a piece of metal which flew from the hammer of a fellow-worker. He was not , aware at first that he had Buffered any serious injury. The defence denied knowledge of the accident. and claimed that notice of it had not been given as prescribed bv the Act. It was also contended that plaintiff had failed to commence his action within the prescribed period of 6ix months. Dr. W. Gillies Borrie, ophthalmic surgeon, said that the loss of sight .was absolutely permanent. Plaintiff said his eye was painful for & long time after the accident. In August the eye began to go blind and In consulted a doctor. A day or two later the sight was tone. Mr. Meredith said the claim must fail because no notice had been given of the accident, and no explanation had been offered for not bringing the case .within six months. Mr. Tuck said it was only nine davs before the expiry of the six months that plaintiff knew the injury was serious. -Mr. Meredith said that nothing had be •in done until four months after plaintiff knew he was going to lose the sight of fhe eye. Mr. Justice Frazer said there did nob seem to be any justification for the plaintiff's failure to give notice, nor did the circumstances afford anv excuse for not commencing the action .•within six months. Judgment was for defendant. Leave was reserved to apolv for costs.