CLAIM FOR £864

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23592, 28 February 1940, Page 14

CLAIM FOR £864

WORKER'S ARM HURT ACCIDENT CARRYING GLASS DEFENCE MOVES FOR NONSUIT The hearing of a claim for £864 damages brought- by a leadlight worker, Charles Alfred Knill (Mr. Coates), who was injured on January 27, 1939, against Phillipps and Impey, Limited (Mr. Hore and Mr. Weir), was continued in the Supreme Court before Mr. Justice Blair and a jury yesterday. Plaintiff, in his statement of claim, alleged that he was instructed to go to the science block of Auckland University College to unpack plate glass and carry it upstairs. While carrying the glass plaintiff suffered a severe cut on the left forearm, resulting in paralysis of tin? ulnar nerve. He was still incapacitated from work, lie claimed £ll4 15s 2d special and £750 general damages.. At the conclusion of the evidence for the plaintiff. Mr. Weir formally moved for a nonsuit, or alternatively for judgment for the defendant company. His Honor reserved his decision on both points until after"the evidence for the defendant had been heard. The defence was a denial of negligence. Dr. Morris Axford said plaintiff would be able to do light labouring work, such as gardening. Me would not, however, be able to follow his former occupation.

Thomas Roy Sussex, manager of the defendant company, said the use of rubber grips was not necessary on plate glass of the size plaintiff was carrying when injured. There were rubber grips at the store. The men were not required to use them, but if they did so the grips were there for them to use. The handling of glass was 90 per cent confidence and 10 per cent skill. Plaintiff was always quite confident. John Addis Redwood, manager of the Auckland Glass Company, Limited, said he had worked with the plaintiff 25 years ago and had seen him handling large sheets of glass. Witness bad never seen a man using grips when handling glass of the size plaintiff was carrying on the day of the accident. William George Greenwood, foreman glazier of the defendant company, said he would not use grips on glass of that size, although other men would. Further evidence for the defence will be heard to-day.