Shiel v Plunkett
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Judgment Date | 01 January 1965 |
Date | 01 January 1965 |
Court | Supreme Court |
Added peril - Question of degree - Bull-dozer driver - Sitting on rear portion of tractor - Time for commencement of proceedings - Mistake - Whether material that mistake due to negligence - Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934, s. 31 (2).
The workman was employed as a bulldozer driver. When the bulldozer was being transferred to another site, it was part of his duty to accompany it, to "keep up with it and be adjacent to it". The bulldozer was towed on a low-loader by a tractor in excess of walking pace. While going uphill it was the workman's custom to mount the tractor at the rear portion, resting his feet on the drawbar between the tractor and the low-loader. On one such uphill journey the workman fell off and sustained injuries. The workman informed his solicitor that he was employed by C. and P.The solicitor, aware that C. and P. were no longer in partnership, assumed or deduced that the workman was working for C. and issued proceedings against C. A day after the expiration of the statutory six months, the solicitor discovered P. in fact was the employer and he immediately instituted proceedings against P.The Circuit Court Judge, while inclining to extend the time, dismissed the claim on the grounds that the accident did not arise out of and in the course of the workmans employment since the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Duignan v R F. Fry (Associates) Ltd
...within the time limit. Therefore, I would allow this appeal. McLoughlin J. :— I agree. 1 See pp. 188-9, post. 2 See p. 188, post. 3 [1965] Ir. Jur. Rep. 27. 4 [1959] I.R. 5 See p. 188, post. 6 See p. 188-9, post. 7 [1959] I.R. 377. 8 (1953) 87 I.L.T.R. 170. 9 [1896] A.C. 44. 10 [1959] I.R. ......