COMPENSATION CLAIM.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3623, 7 April 1927, Page 3

COMPENSATION CLAIM.

SHAREMILKER’S ACCIDENT

The Arbitration Court sat at Palmerston North on Tuesday to adjudicate on a ease wherein Frederick Alfred Williams, shnremilker, of Foxton, proceeded against Elizabeth Neylon, widow, farmer, of Foxton, claiming compensation. His Honour, Mr. Justice Frazer presided, and associated with him on the bench were Messrs. W. Scott (employers’ representative) and A. L. Monteith (workers’ representative).

The statement of claim set out that, while plaintiff was employed by defendant as a sharemilker on the latter’s farm property situated near Foxton, he met with an accident. on February 10, 1020, in consequence mhereof he had been and still was totally disabled from working. On the date aforesaid plaintiff strained or otherwise injured his heart through lifting a heavy pipe while endeavouring to repair a well on defendant’s farm property, and, as a result of such strain or injury, plaintiff had since and was now suffering from damage to the heart muscles. Defendant had refused to pay compensation; wherefore plaintiff claimed a weekly payment of £3 15s from February 16 until the date of hearing of thp claim, sucli further payment as might be shown to be reasonable and £1 towards medical expenses. The defence was a general denial of the allegations. It was admitted that defendant had refused to pay compensation, and it was asserted that, if plaintiff had suffered injury by accident as alleged, then notice of the accident had not been given as soon as practicable after the happening thereof. Mr. M. B. Bergin (Foxton) appeared for plaintiff and Mr. H. F. O’Leary (Wellington) for defendant.

In evidence, Louisa Williams, wife of plaintiff, stated that prior to the accident, her husband’s health had been very good, and that he never complained of the work. After the accident he had stayed in bed for a couple of days and thereafter was not able to do the same work as lie had done prior to the occurrence.

Geoffrey Williams, son of plaintiff, a postal cadet, deposed that he and a brother had finally shifted the pipe, the attempted removal of which had caused his father to strain himself. On being weighed, it was found to go 1151bs.

Dr. E. M. W'yliio, of Foxton, stated that plaintiff had been under his care since the accident. His condition, on the first examination, had been bad; the heart had been greatly dilated and there had been very obvioss signs of valvular trouble. Plaintiff had been ordered to lied and told to take every care of himself. In May he had shown signs of improvement, and two months later, as the result of becoming melancholic, had been allowed to get up, but not to do any work. However, in November, he had had to go hack to bed, and ever since then his condition had been getting worse. He had explained that he had strained himself in endeavouring to lift a pipe, and, from the history of the case, witness had no reason to doubt that.

Plaintiffs evidence, which was on the lines of the statement of claim, and which had been taken at Foxton owing to plaintiff being in a serious condition and unable to attend, was put in. In evidence for the defence, Dr. Giosen, of Wellington, stated that, from an examination of plaintiff and a knowledge of the history of the case, lie had no doubt that plaintiff had been suffering from heart disease for some time prior to the accident, and that such disease had made itself apparent only on his endeavouring to perform the task of pulling tile pipe out of the ground Many people with valvular trouble went about their occupations without. any knowledge of their condition until they attempted to do something unusual, when the disease manifested itself in a breakdown. This concluded the evidence, and, following a brief adjournment, His Honour stated that, in all cases of" this kind, the court had to be guided entirely by the facts. rule,” he proceeded, “is that the plaintiff must prove that there was an accident; that is to say, that something occurred that produced some physiological result. We know that in these heart cases it very often happens that a man may be suffering from heart disease for many years, and that his heart may break down without any strain or accident at all. It very often happens that a man’s heart breaks down while he is resting in bed; it may happen quite apart from any strain at all. Coming to the facts of this case, we find that plaintiff suffered from some form of heart disease which might reasonably be expected to make itself felt by some premonitory symptoms. There were no premonitory symptoms, and the man did heavy work right up to the time of this collapse. His heavy strain was immediately followed by acute dilation of hi s heart, in other words, a physiological change. The court is forced to say in a case of this kind that there wa3 a sudden strain, and that such strain was, in all probability, the cause of the sudden bulging of the heart. There seems to be no doubt that plaintiff met with an accident in the sense in which the word is used in the Workers’ Compensation Act; he strained his heart while at his work and is entitled to compensation.” His Honour did not think that judgment should be entered for a lump sum, as owing to the serious illness

of the plaintic the rights of the defendants might have to be considered at an early date. Judgment, His Honour added, would he for compensation at the rate of £3 15s per week from the time of the accident till .the end of the period of liability, with costs. i

With regard to the above action, we have been asked to publish the fact that Mrs Neylon had the late Mr Williams insured, and she was only the nominal defendant. The share-milking on the farm has been continued by the late Mr Williams’ family since the accident.