REMOVAL EXPENSES.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIV, Issue 4581, 2 July 1923, Page 3

REMOVAL EXPENSES.

A SUCCESSFUL CLAIM. A case on the question of an employer’s liability to pay the fares and expenses of removal to the North Island of an employee who was engaged in the South Island to work in Wellington was decided by Mr F. K. 'Hunt, on Friday. Plaintiff, Thomas Rowell, alleged that he had engaged defendant, A. Myles, at Invercargill, to to work as a baker in Wellington, and had lent him sufficient to shift himself, family, and furniture to the north. Defendant gave evidence that the plaintiff had himself agreed to pay out of his own pocket all costs of the removal, and was bound to do so. However, although: plaintiff paid out £136 5s Id, he claimed it back from defendant. After hearing lengthy evidence the Magistrate held that there was no obligation upon an’ employer to pay an employee’s expenses of coming to.-a new town to work under the circumstances unless there was an undertaking by the employer so to do. In this case the conduct of the employee had pot been satisfactory at his work, and the Magistrate was satisfied he had only himself to blame for the trouble that had arisen. The onus of proving an undertaking to pay expenses was on the employee, but the evidence showed that the employer had agreed only tp lend the money. "Judgment was, therefore, entered for plaintiff for £136 5s Id, plus £lO 16s costs.