FARM HAND’S DEATH,

Waikato Times, Volume 114, Issue 19052, 16 September 1933, Page 5

FARM HAND’S DEATH,

FALL ON TO HAYFORK. «< LENT ” TO A NEIGHBOUR. COMPENSATION GRANTED. AUCKLAND, Saturday. ■ In the Arbitration Court yesterday the question whether a farmer was liable to pay compensation for injuries received by a servant lent to •him by a neighbouring farmer was considered. The case arose out of fatal injuries suffered by a farm labourer, Alexander Campbell Williamson, aged 19, at Maromaku, plaintiffs being deceased’s parents, and defendants, Donald Archibald Ross and John Atkins, farmers, of Maromaku. . In the statement of claim it was set out that from November 19, 1932, to February 16, 1933, deceased was ‘ employed on the farm of the defendant Ross. On the latter dale, in accordance with the established farming custom in the district, Ross sent deceased to Atkins, a neighbouring farmer, to assist in haymaking. While on Atkins’ farm, deceased descended from a haystack by a ladder, and in so doing suffered injuries through being pierced by a hayfork. He died on Maroh 16. . Liability was denied by the defendant Ross on the ground that at the time of the aocident deceased was working for and allegedly under the control of Atkins, and also that the aocident did not arise out of deceased s employment by Ross. The defendant Atkins also denied responsibility, alleging that deoeased oame on to his farm of his own free will. There was no contract whereby Atkins employed deceased. In evidence, Ross said he and Atkins some years ago agreed verbally to assist each other in farm work at busy periods, and it was in accordance with this arrangement that witness sent deceased to help Atkins with his haymaking if required. Deceased’s wages were paid by witness. On the day of the aooldent he regarded deceased as his employee.. ■His Honour said that admittedly a oontraet had existed between Ross and deoeased, but there was “ not a little evidence ” of a contract between Atkins and deoeased. The claim against Atkins was dismissed, but plaintiffs succeeded in their action against Ross. They were, awarded £52 general compensation, £44 for medical and funeral expenses, and £l6 16s costs. Ross was ordered to pay the costs of Atkins.