WATERSIDER'S INJURY

New Zealand Times, Volume XLV, Issue 10450, 1 December 1919, Page 2

WATERSIDER'S INJURY

COMPENSATION AWARDED. The compensation claim of William John Cook Love, waterside worker, against tho Wellington Harbour Board, was heard in tho Arbitration Court on Saturday. His Honour Mr Justice Stringer presided, and the assessors werj Mr \V\. Scott (for tho employers) and Mr J. A. McCullough (for the employees). Mr P. J. O'Rcgan appeared for the claimant, and Mr C. H. Treadwell for tho defendant. The claimant set out that while employed on the Queen's wharf on Friday, May 2nd last, in descending from No. 10 crane he slipped from the thir'l rung of tho ladder and fell, sustaining injuries by which he was totally disabled for a period of six weeks. He claimed compensation over, this period to the aniouut of £IZ 2s, including an allowance for medical expenses. Tho Harbour Board denied its liability to provide compensation on thr ground that the plaintiff was drunK: whon the accident occurred. Dr P. F. McEvedy, describing the injuries sustained, said that Love was suffering from a contusion' of the hip and thigh. The plaintiff appeared t« him to be' porfectly sober. The plaintiff stated that between 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. on the day of the accident, in descending the ladder from a crane on which he had been working, he slipped on a greasy rung, falling to the wharf and injuring his right hip. At dinner timo he had had a "Wanganui" shandy. Ho had previously had one about 5 p.m. To Mr O'Regan: :llis eyesight was poor, resulting from an injury received in his work. Opening the case for the Harbour Board, Mr Treadwell said he would call evidence in support of its contention that the plaintiff was affected by drink at the time of the accident. A member of\ the Harbour Board's staff. John. Riley Scrimgeour, said that on the afternoon of the day of the accident ho smelt liquor on Love, but ho did not notice that he was drunk. Later, however, after tea, -he saw him talking to another man, and he then appeared to be the worse for liquor. At about 7.30 he saw Love coming stumbling to. wards him, and ho complained that he had slipped from the third rung of the ladder and hurt his hip. He still appeared to be affected by drink. He was not properly sober. In reply to Mr O'Regan, witness said he had not actually seen the plaintiff drunk. Evidence was also given by Lawrence Arcus, another Harbour Board official. Constable Cosgrave said that when ho arrived on the scene after the accident he- was impressed that Love was so I much under the influence of liquor that he was incapable of working a crane. His Honour said that the evidence brought was not sufficient to Justify the contention that ,Love was oru&Js, and that the accident resulted from his condition. Mr O'Regan admitted that the facts had not been brought out as" he had anticipated. The court awarded the amount claimed, with £7 7s costs, and- witnesses' expenses.