Argument in Supreme Court.

Te Puke Times, 30 September 1932, Page 3

Argument in Supreme Court.

Claim Against Tauranga Electric

Power Board

The claim of a linesman formerly in the employ of the Tauranga Electric Power Board for compensation for a serious accident which be suffered at Te Puke on June 6th, 1930, was argued before Mr Justice Smith on day in the Supreme Court at Auckland. The plaintiff waR Frederick Charles Vincent, of Tauranga, and it was admitted that he had suffered injury in the course of his employment. Mr H. O. Cooney, with him Mr L. E. Manning, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr V. Meredith, who had associated with him Mr McCarthy, for the defendants. Plaintiff alleged that at the time of Hie accident; he was ordered by a servant of the defendant board to-work on a transformer connected with a high power line when it had not been disconnected and rendered safe in accordance with the regulations. As a result of coming into contact with a live wire he was so severely burned and injured that his right foot and the big toe of his Jeft foot had to be amputated ; he suffered internal rupture, and his shoulder, neck, head and back were burned. He claimed that he was totally incapacitated, and considered that he would be almost totally incapacitated for the rest of bis life: He asked for £269 for hospital and nursing expenses, £2OB additional for loss of wages, and £3OOO general damages. The Power Board, stating that it had paid plaintiff £299 on account of the accident, denied that it had failed to comply with the regulations, or had been guilty of any negligence. It alleged that the accident was due wholly or partly to Vincent’s own negligence, and that he had failed to obey express instructions. Alter* natively, the Board pleaded that the accident had been caused by the negligence of a fellow>ervant and the claim was therefore subject to the limitations imposed by the Workers’ Compensation Act j or, as a further alternative, that the claim had not been commenced within six months as required by the Electric Power Boards Act.

The proceedings on Tuesday took the form of argument before trial, chiefly to determine whether the time for lodging the claim had not been allowed to pass. After hearing counsel for the plaintiff and for the defendants, His Honour reserved his decision.