SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3099, 1 June 1917, Page 7

SUPREME COURT

CLAIM FOR COMMISSION 'VERDICT FOR PLAINTIFF In. (he Supreme Cowl. yesterday Hi:i Honour Mr. Justice Hocking and a. jury of four concluded tho hearing of the claim for commission mado by Robert Angoll, of Ghuznro SI reel. cAnvnsicr. against Johnston and Co., of •* WillisStreet, publishers. , Mr. A.. W. fllo.tr appeared for pla.itii-in and Mr. I'. J. O'Regan for defendant*;. Plaintiff'n claim was for -fi.loß Ms. 2d. This amount he alleged was dun .to him under tho terms of tin with defendant*, irho had employed: him in December, 191+. to canvass for orders for History of the- Great Eumpenn War." Tim det'enco was thai, all duos In plaintiff had boen paid to dole. Tho jury found that plaintiff was entitled, after tho delivery of tho fourth volume, of tho work, to be paid commission as if eight volumes had been ordered. Mr. Bkir moved thai; judgment be entered for plaintiff, bui His Honour adjourned Uio case to cnablo the Itogifitrar lo Uko accounts.

INJURY TO WHARF LABOURER CLAIM FOE -£501 DAMAGES. Before tho Chief Justice (Sjr Robert Stout) and a jury of twelve, George Camwell, a Wellington waterside worker, claimed J&SOL damages front tho Blackball Coal Company, Ltd. Mr. P. .1. O'liegan appeared for plainlift' and Mr. Keith Kirkcnldic for tho defendant company. Plaintiff in bis statement of claim alleged that about Friday. October IS. 19t(i, ho was employed by the defendant company to assist in discharging coal from ono of tho steamships of the defendant company, thou moored at the. Kailway Wharf, "Wellington. Plaintiff was standing on a plank about 18 inches in width, extending for tho length of a r;ti6ed tramway or trolly-way leading frc/m tho ship to railway trucks on tho wharf. Tho plank and trolly-way wero supported by trestles standing on. tho wharf, and wero raised about ton J sot abovo tho deck thereof. It was plaintiff's duty to recoivo each basket of coal as it was hoisted, placo it on a small trolly, and push the trolly towards tho railway truck. Plaintiff was struck by a basket of coal, knocked off the plank, and thrown, to tho deck of tho wharf. Ho received severe injuries, and had since been disabled from, undertaking work of any kind. Ho was advised that bis present condition would continue for some considerable time, and that it was doubtful if he would over mako a complete recovery. Plaintiff attributed tho accident to tho inexperience of tho man employed by defendants to havo charge of the "bull-rope," and contended that defendants knew, or ought to havo known, of tho man's unfitness for the work. He alternatively contended that tho accident was duo to the negligence of. tho man in question, and he claimed damages from the company for injuries received through the negiigenco of a fellow-servant. The company admitted liability under the Workers' Compensation Act, and liad made payments in accordance with the provision's of the Act. This roraody plaintiff did not consider adequate, and ho accordingly claimed JBSOI damages. Tho defendant company denied plaintiff's allegation that he had Tecoived sorious injuries. It admitted that since tho accident he had beon incapacitated, but said that his incapacity was duo to chronic rheumatism. Defendants Te. pudiated the' suggestion of negligonce, and alleged that plaintiff, while not attending to his' duties, received a slight knock which caused him to fall. They further pleaded that tho accident was inevitable. Evidence was heard, and tho case was adjourned till to-day.