INJURY TO A FOOT

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 612, 14 March 1929, Page 7

INJURY TO A FOOT

COMPENSATION CLAIMED INTRICATE PROBLEM FOR COURT In being asked to assess the degree of incapacity suffered by a waterside worker as the result of injury to a foot, Mr. Justice Frazer and his associates, Messrs. A. L. Monteith and G. T. Booth, were presented in the tration Court yesterday with a problem of unusual intricacy. Plaintiff was Alma George Hutchens (Mr. J. J. Sullivan) and defendant, the Union Steam Ship Company, Ltd. (Mr Bagnall). The statement of claim set out that on July 12, 1928, plaintiff was unloading coal when a basket struck him on one foot, so injuring him that he had since been unable to work. The company had paid the plaintiff compensation at the rate of £ 3 13s 3d a week until January 23, but had refused further compensation. He therefore claimed £3 13s 4d a week from that date to the present time, £1 for medical expenses and such further compensation by way of a lump sum as was shown to be reasonable. Mr. Bagnall informed his Honour that the defendant company had since paid a further £35 into court for compensation until May. Dr. S. Bull gave evidence that the arch of the foot had given way to a serious extent. Twenty per cent, total disability would be a fair estimate, said witness.

Mr. Kenneth Mackenzie considered the disability 30 per cent of the foot, or 20 per cent total disability. Witness thought the arch would never be restored. Dr. R. Swanston said he had assessed the disability at 23 per cent, total. Tliere was little chance of the foot improving. For the defendant company Dr. E. H. B. Milsom, who had several times examined the injury, said that, although plaintiff had a flat foot, incapacity would only arise from the pain caused. Witness, however, did not think the foot permanently damaged and the man should be able to return to his work in two months. After a short retirement the Court, in announcing its decision, said: “We think the only thing we can safely go on is an authoritative statement by Mr. Mackenzie, that the military authorities, in dealing with pensions, allow something more than 20 per cent, for flat foot,” said his Honour. “It is common ground that the man has been fit for work of a kind for some months. The fairest and only reasonable settlement is to treat him as fit for some sort of light work, and we award him 20 per cent, of full disability, that is, 30 per cent, of the foot, as from November 1. No compensation for neurasthenia will be allowed from that time. We will give credit for anything paid since November 1.” Mr. Sullivan computed the amount of compensation paid on that basis, with deductions, would be about £l2O. WATERSIDER’S CLAIM SETTLED OUT OF COURT Settlement was reached out of court in a case in which Henry Owsley (Mr. J. J. Sullivan) sought compensation from the New Zealand Shipping Co., Ltd. (Mr. Bagnall) as the result of an accident on the waterfront on January 10 last.

A box of butter rolled on to Owsley’s left hand during stacking operations, and he received injury to the hand and wrist.

It was stated that the company had paid into court 25 per cent, of full compensation, but an agreement had since been made for the payment of 30 per cent., which Mr. Sullivan said would amount to about £214.