COURT OF ARBITRATION.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1777, 16 June 1913, Page 9

COURT OF ARBITRATION.

CLAIMS FOE INJURY. a HURT .'WHILI!' FELLING TREEs! J | The Court of Arbitration 'was engaged I in Scaring a compensation case on featur- 6 | day morning. "Mr.'Justice Sim presided, ( | and sitting with him as assessors wero £ J Mr. Win. Scott ■ (employers' rcprcsenta- I I tire), and Mr. J. A. M'Cullough (emB pioyves' representative). In tho action. > 1 .before the Court' tho. claimant was Neil ' Lamont, labourer, of Martinborough. and ' i the defendant was Donald Ros9, farmer,. r of r Martinborough. Mr. 1\ J. O'ltegan ' 1 'appeared for Lamont, while Mr. T.. JorI drin, .of Mflsterton,. appeared for Ross. 'It"eared,from the proceedings that Lamont' lia'd been in tlie employment..of | Samuel Mitchell, wlio was carrying out a i bushfelling contract for Ross. The state- i tnont of claim alleged that in the course i of his employment on December 15, 1911, Lament had hiß leg broken through a | tree falling upon him. Ho was romoved to Ross's homestead, where (it was al- i leged) Ross Interviewed him. and agreed to pay him wages.until sucn time as he recovered from the effects of the accident. Later, Lamont was removed to the hospital at Greytown, where he remained until March 18, 1912. After this I' he returned, to Ross's homestead, where ho was located until December 29, up to which date ho (Lamont) was under the Impression that he would receive wages. As a result of tho accident, Lamont was totally incapacitated for a period of eight months, a,n<l he had sustained permanent partial incapacity. Ross lad paid £10 10s. medical expenses, and .£l3 19s. to the hospital. Lamont now camo to the Court to sccuro a lump sum as compensation | for loss of wages. By way of defence, RosS said that the two payments which ho had made wero ex gratia payments, made without any admission of liability. He denied that he was liable to pay Lamont any compensation. Ross further said that Lamont was not entitled to recover compensation, the action not bavin? been commenced within the statutory time. On tho question of delay in commencing tho action, Mr. O'Regan contended that Ross had given on undertaking which had tho effect of lulling Lamont into a senss of security. It would. be shown that it was not until Dtcembor 27 last that Ross did not admit liability to the extent Lamont expected. Counsel then called medical and other evidence in support of Lamont's claim. , , , '• Mr. Jordan aSttd that Lamont should bo nonsuited 6n the ground that he had not complied With tho provisions of the statute . . , , Tho Court reserved'this point, and evidence* was then called for tho defence. After counsel had delivered their addresses, his Honour intimated that tho Court would take timp to consider its decision.