صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

XX. Compensation recoverable (sched. I.)

129

a. Text of schedule I.

129

b. Meaning of phrase "where death results from the injury''

(1 la)

132

c. Amount recoverable in case of death by persons dependent

upon the workman's earnings (1a)

134

d. Amount recoverable by workman totally or partially inca-

pacitated (116)

136

e. “Average weekly earnings" (12)

149

1. In general

149

2. Grades

150

3. Concurrent employments

152

4. Absences from work

152

5. Period of employment forming basis for computa-

tion of average weekly earnings

155

6. Trade or calendar weeks

156

7. Continuity of the employment

157

8. Deductions

158

9. Remuneration other than regular wages

159

f. Medical examination of injured workman (11 4, 14, 15) 160

g. Payments to dependents (19 5–7)

162

h. Determination of question who are dependents (18) 163

i. Varying of the award (1 9)

163

j. Review of weekly payments (116)

163

k. Payment of lump sum (117)

172

1. Set-offs against weekly payments (19)

174

XXI. Arbitration (sched. II.)

174

a. Text of schedule II.

174

b. Construction of these provisions

177

1. Functions of committee's representative of the em-

ployer and his workmen

177

2. Powers and functions of arbitrators

177

3. Appeals

178

4. Costs

181

5. Registration of memorandums of agreements

184

6. Proceedings by parties interested"

187

7. Enforcement of awards and agreements

188

8. Rectification of the register

188

9. Agreements as to lump sums

189

10. Court in which proceedings may be brought

190

11. Deductions from awards

190

12. Reference to medical referees

190

13. Provisions applicable to Scotland only

191

XXII. Act of 1900

191

a. Text of the act

191

b. Effect of these provisions

191

XXIII. Employments to which the act of 1897 was applicable

192

a. Text of 8 n of the act of 1897

192

b. Scope and effect of these provisions in general

193

c. Meaning of the phrase "on or in or about

193

1. In general

193

2. On, in or about a "railroad"

193

3. -a "factory!

194

4. -a "mine's

195

5. —"engineering work”.

195

6. —"premises on which principal has undertaken to

.

[ocr errors]

On compensation for death or injury by lightning

Hoenig v. Industrial Commission

339

Klawinski v. Lake Shore & M. S. R. Co.

342

State ex rel. Peoples Coal & Ice Co. v. District Court

344

Annotation

347

On intoxication as affecting right to compensation

Nekoosa-Edwards Paper Co. v. Industrial Commission

348

Annotation

351

On what constitutes serious and wilful misconduct":

Clem v. Chalmers Motor Co.

352

Annotation

355

On rights and remedies where injuries are caused by negligence of third

persons

Peet v. Mills

358

Annotation

360

On what are casual employees''

Gaynor v. Standard Accident Insurance Co.

363

Annotation

365

On when man and wife are "living together!

Northwestern Iron Co. v. Industrial Commission

366

Annotation

370

On "average weekly earnings" of workman employed by several employers

Gillen v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation

371

Annotation

373

On consideration of possible earnings in other employments

Mellen Lumber Co. v. Industrial Commission

374

Annotation

377

On inability to get work as incapacity for work"

Re Sullivan

378

Annotation

380

On effect of refusal of injured workman to submit to operation

Jendrus v. Detroit Steel Products Co.

381

Annotation

387

On constitutionality of workmen's compensation and industrial insurance

statutes

Kentucky State Journal Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Board 389

Jensen v. Southern Pacific Co.

403

Annotation

409

On extraterritorial effect of workmen's compensation acts; conflict of laws

Pendar v. H. & B. American Machine Co.

428

Reynolds v. Day

432

Kennerson v. Thames Towboat Co.

436

Annotation

443

On limitation of application of state compensation statutes by Federal laws

State ex rel. Jarvis v. Daggett

446

Staley v. Illinois Central R. Co.

450

Annotation

461

On allowance for services of physician and nurse for injured workman

Milwaukee v. Miller [1]

465

On compensation for death by drowning

Boody v. K. & C. Mfg. Co. [10]

474

On compensation where injury is aggravated by sport

Kill v. Industrial Commission [14]

478

On compensation for injuries while performing work not employed to do

Spooner v. Detroit Saturday Night Co. [17]

481

On compensation for injuries while going to push time clock

Rayner v. sligh Furniture Co. [22]

486

WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION.

Part A. Introductory.

injuries, for which there had been no 1. Introduction and scope of note.

previous common-law or statutory rem

edy, the attempt has also been made to The purpose of this annotation is to simplify the procedure so as to make the bring together the English and Colonial recovery quickly, easily, and inexpenand American cases involving the appli- sively obtainable, thus doing away with cation and effect of the so-called work- the great delay and expense which so men's compensation acts. The most radi- often attended former actions for percal departure in these statutes from sonal injuries to employees.? the common law or the previous statu- In an annotation of this character, an tory law is the awarding of compensa- investigation of the causes leading up to tion in cases of injuries to workmen in the passage of these acts, and the ethical, the absence of any negligence, actual or humanitarian, or sociological theories unimputed, on the part of the employer. I derlying them, would be out of place. The defenses of coservice and assump- | The discussion will be confined to the tion of risk are entirely abrogated, as is case law upon the subject, and the judithe defense of contributory negligence, cial conclusions as to the meaning of the except in cases where the negligence of various provisions of the acts will be set the injured servant amounts to serious forth, and, as far as possible, harmonor wilful misconduct. In support of ized, so that the general applicability these advanced steps, the injury to a and effect of the statute, as judicially workman has frequently been compared interpreted, will be shown for future to the breaking of a machine, and as the guidance. cost of repairing the latter is borne by As these statutes constitute an entirethe industry, so should the burden of ly new departure in the law of employinjuries to workmen be considered as ers' liability, it is not surprising that an incidental expense of the business. 1 there are numerous conflicting decisions,

In addition to giving compensation for many of which are due to the inconsist

1 The act means that, apart from negli- | to throw the risk of accidents upon the gence, “the industry itself should be taxed trade in which they occur, and that the with an obligation to indemnify the sufferer employer can recoup himself for the cost for what was an ‘accident' causing dam- incurred by him by raising the price of age.” Lord Halsbury, L. C., in Brintons v. his productions and by reducing wages.' Turvey [1905] A. C. (Eng.) 230, 74 L. J. 2 After mentioning certain difficulties enK. B. N. S. 474, 53 Week. Rep. 641, 92 L. T. countered by an injured workman in atN. S. 578, 21 Times L. R. 444, 2 Ann. Cas. tempting to recover damages at common 137.

law or under the employers' liability act, The essential operation of the statutes Lord Brampton, in Cooper v. Wright (1902] herein discussed is, broadly speaking, that, A. C. (Eng.) 302, said: “Added to these irrespective of any negligence or miscon obstacles, the law itself was for the most duct on the master's part, the classes of part too uncertain, too dilatory, and far servants to whom they are applicable are, too expensive for an ordinary workman in a certain sense, insured against any to embark in.” accident that takes place in the course of Lord Stirling, in Field v. Longden (1902) their employment. Cooper v. Wright (1902] 1 K. B. (Eng.) 47, 71 L. J. K. B. N. S. 120, A. C. (Eng.) 302, 71 L. J. K. B. N. S. 642, 66 J. P. 291, 50 Week. Rep. 212, 85 L. T. 51 Week. Rep. 12, 86 L. T. N. S. 776, 18 N. S. 571, 18 Times L. R. 65, observed that Times L. R. 622, per Lord Halsbury. the compensation act "was intended for

In 11 Journ. of Soc. of Comparative Legis- the benefit of workmen, and not for that lation, p. 55, will be found an interesting of the legal profession." and instructive criticism of the unsatisfac- 3 Lord Brampton, in Cooper V. Wright tory features of this act. The learned con- (Eng.) supra, stated that the English act tributor, Sir J. G. Hill, also gives much was so framed as to provoke rather than useful information concerning similar legis- to minimize litigation. lation in the countries of Continental Europe In Oliver v. Nautilus Steam Shipping Co. and elsewhere. He remarks that "the justi- (1903] 2 K. B. (Eng.) 639, Lord Vaughan fication put forward for these new laws is Williams said: "The act is not very easy that it is expedient in the public interest to construe. It is an act as to which I

« السابقةمتابعة »