COMPENSATION CLAIM ARISING FROM WHARF ACCIDENT PART HEARD

Wanganui Chronicle, 3 May 1949, Page 6

COMPENSATION CLAIM ARISING FROM WHARF ACCIDENT PART HEARD

An accident at Castleclpiff on May 25 last, when a waterside worker, Leo Domnick Serra, received an injury to his right knee was followed by a claim for compensatnon against the Northern Steamship Co., Ltd., at a sitting of the Compensation Court in Wanganui yesterday afternoon. The claim was on the basis of Serra being incapacitated, and the only points in dispute were the extent of his injury and loss of earnings. After hearing medical evidence, Mr Justice Ongley suggested that doctors from each side examine plaintiff s knee and see if they could agree as to its condition. The most recent examination was on April 25 by'a doctor for the defendant company, who had said that plaintiff was fit to resume his normal occupation. Counsel agreed to an adjournment and the hearing will be resumed at 10 a.m. today. Mr. C. H. Arndt (Wellington) appeared for plaintiff and the Northern Steamship Company was represented by Mr. D. G. Young (Wanganui). The statement of claim set out that on May 25, last, .plaintiff was employed as a waterside worker at Castlecliff and was assisting with the discharge of cargo from the company s coastal vessel Hauturu. Plaintiff stated that while employed he was standing on a case and pulling another case from a stack, when the one on which he was standing tipped, causing him to go down on his right knee. As the result of an injury received he had been wholly incapacitated for work and would be for some indefinite period to come. Plaintiff also claimed that he would always be partially incapacitated, and that at the time of the accident his weekly earnings, calculated in accordance with the Workers' Compensation Act, 1922, were not less than £ll a week. Plaintiff claimed compensation at the rate of £5 10s a week for temporary total incapacity from February 9, 1949, for such period as the incapacity should continue, and compensation for permanent partial incapacity by reason of the injury and the loss of earnings resulting -from it. POINTS IN DISPUTE. Opening for plaintiff, Mr. Arndt said that the material facts, were admitted, but the points in dispute were the extent of his injuries and loss of earnings. Medical evidence had already “been called in Wellington to the effect that plaintiff would not be able to resume his normal occupation as a waterside worker, and further evidence would be given by Wanganui doctors in support of this. "This is a loss of earnings case and t be question to be decided is what plaintiff s future will be,” Mr. Arndt added. Dr. Robert H. Bowie said plaintiff first consulted him on May 26, last, the day after the accident. He gave a history of the mishap and said he had twisted his right knee. The knee I was swollen and he could not walk properly. Witness prescribed treatment which included a rest. He had met with a similar accident previously. After the second injury, the knee remained very sore and plaintiff was referred to Dr. H. K. Christie for further treatment. Witness saw horn on different occasions and on April 22 made a further examination. Plaintiff said that he still experienced pain when he stood on his right leg for a long time, that he still had a "clicking” in the knee, and at night had pain which kept him awake. An examination showed that there was a considerable improvement, but in the opinion of witness plaintiff would not be able to do any work other than that which required merely standing or sitting. As a result his percentage of his total disability might be up to 40. Mr. Arndt: Will he be able to resume work as a waterside worker? Witness: I don't think that he will be able to do that.

Cross-examined by Mr. Young, witness sqid he would not necessarily expect an X-ray examination of the knee to show any injury. Mr. Young: If his disability is up to 40 per cent., how low might it be? Witness: About 20, I should say. Dr. G. H. Roberton said he had read the evidence of Dr. Kennedy Elliott, given at the preliminary hearing in Wellington, and agreed with his finding. Witness added that he had examined plaintiff on two recent occasions and agreed that he would not. be able to resume work as a watersider. He would not be able to do work which involved walking, standing or climbing over obstacles. In his opinion, witness added, the condition of the’knee would deteriorate. WORKERS CLASSIFIED. William George Upton, secretary of the Wanganui branch of the New Zealand Waterside Workers’ Union, said all the men at this port were classified as A grade, indicating that they could undertake all classes of work. If a man refused to do a particular class of job he would lose his guaranteed wage of £5 10s for the week, and if he did this continually he would be classified as a B grade man. No B grade men, however, were employed in Wanganui, and there was only enough work for the A grade men. If plaintiff was unlit, as the doctors stated, he would not be able to earn a living on the waterfront. Cross-examined by Mr. Young, witness said that plaintiff was still a member of the union. He could report for work and take his chance on getting a job. In reply to His Honour, witness said that as no B grade men were employed in Wanganui there was no basis on which an opinion could be expressed, but it would be very difficult for a B grade man to earn very much. Opening the case for the defendant company, Mr. Young said the defence was a complete denial that plaintiffs condition was such as to prevent him from returning to his future duties. Dr. 11. K. Christie, orthopaedic specialist for the Wanganui Hospital Board's district, said he had examined plaintiff on several occasions, the first being in June, 1948. Witness described the treatment given and said that

he had seen the patient frequently. On January 8, last, he again examined the knee and found that the effects of the accident had largely passed off. Witness considered that from January 10 plaintiff would be fit for light duties, and that after four weeks would be able to resume his normal duties. JJ J u Early in March, witness added, he and the medical superintendent at the Wanganui Hospital, Dr. H. L. Widdowson, again examined plaintiff. They came to the conclusion that his condition was practically the same and that he was fit to return to his employment. further examination. On April 25, Dr Widdowson and witness again examined the knee. In his opinion, witness added, plaintiff should be able to resume his normal icc.upation. In reply to His Honour, witness said his last examination was on April 25. His Honour: And you say that, the knee has a good rate of movement, that there is no sign of swelling, or fluid on the joint? Witness: That is so. His Honour: Could not the doctors of each side get together and examine this man’s knee and see if they can agree to that? Mr “Arndt said that if there was any chance of the case being settled he would agree to it. Mr. Young: Dr. Bowie and Dr. Robertson have both agreed that there was no difference in the measurements of the knee. His Honour; I gather that Dr. Bowie said there was nothing objec--1 live tl at he could point to. 1 Mr. Arndt said that in view of these ! features he would agree to an ad--1 journment so that, he could consider ■ the matter. The case wll be resumed at 10 a.m. t oday.