ARBITRATION COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23866, 21 July 1939, Page 3

ARBITRATION COURT

CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT AWARDED INJURY TO WATERSIDE WORKER Reserved judgment in favour of the plaintiff has been delivered by Mr Justice Callan in the Court of Arbitration in the case in which James Bell, a waterside worker, proceeded against John Mill and Co., Ltd., for compensation for an injury received while he was working on the Dunedin wharves. Mr Justice Callan presided at the hearing, and associated with him were Mr W, Cecil Prime and Mr A. L. Monteith. , Mr F. B. Adams and Mr J. B. Deaker represented the plaintiff, and Mr A. N. Haggitt appeared for the defendant, company. In his claim, the plaintiff stated that on March 26, 1938, he was employed by the defendant company loading the vessel Melbourne Maru. While so employed, he met with a personal accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. The accident was caused by a wool dump falling on the plaintiff’s right foot, causing severe bruising and injury to the toes. At the time of the accident the plaintiff’s earnings were £5 17s 3d a week, and by reason of the accident he had been wholly incapacitated from following his usual or any employment, and would never be able to follow his usual employment. He would in future be able to do only light work, if and when he could obtain it. The defendant had paid the plaintiff weekly compensation at the rate of £3 18s 3d from March 26 to November 19. The plaintiff claimed from the defendant a weekly payment of £3 18s 3d, by way of compensation. to commence from March 28. 1938, credit being given for the payments already made, and to continue until the payments were ended, diminished, or reduced, or a lump sum in lieu thereof was paid, as the court should think fit. He also claimed £1 medical expenses, the costs of the present action, and such further relief as might be just. After a lengthy review of the evidence and of the legal discussions on the facts, the judgment concludes:— “In the court’s view, the injury which the plaintiff has suffered produces a partial incapacity supervening on the period of total incapacity and continuing over the balance of the statutory period of six years. The court is further of opinion that the actual measure of the resultant incapacity is at all times greater than the amount to which the plaintiff would be entitled under the second schedule for those portions of his injuries which fall within the schedule. “The judgment of the court is, therefore, as follows:—Plaintiff is entitled for a period of 31 i weeks, being the period from the cessation of payments to the date of hearing, to double full compensation, which is £3 18s 3d a week. The figure under this part of the claim, therefore. comes to £246 9s Bd. As to the resultant actual partial incapacity. the view of the court is that the plaintiff is reduced in actual fact to a capacity equal to the award rate of £4 6s a week fixed for a liftman and cleaner. Upon this basis he is entitled to compensation at £1 Os lid per week for the remainder of the period of liability, which is 244 J weeks. The relevant amount, commuted, it £ 230 ss. The plaintiff is also entitled to £ 1 medical expenses if this has not already been paid.” Costs, amounting to £ 10 10s, were awarded, and witnesses’ expenses for two medical witnesses at £2 2s each, and , the other witnesses at Magistrate Court scale. A LAY PRESIDENT SUGGESTED LABOUR FEDERATION’S VIEW A suggestion that the president of the Arbitration Court should be a layman and not a man with legal training is included in proposals which have been drawn up by the New Zealand Federation of Labour for a change in the constitution of the court, according to the Labour paper the Standard. It is proposed by the federation that the work of dealing with industrial disputes should be entirely separated from the hearing of workers’ compensation and accident cases. The suggestion is made that a separate Workers’ Compensation Court should be set up. to be presided over by the present judge of the Arbitration Court. Mr Justice O’Regan. The Standard also stated that the unsatisfactory position in regard to the Court of Arbitration and its failure to function so far as industrial matters were concerned was discussed by the national executive of the Federation of Labour and representatives of the 18 district trades councils. The executive was instructed to draw up proposals in conjunction with the New Zealand Employers’ Federation and the New Zealand Manufacturers’ Federation and to report to the Minister ol ( Labour.