Young v Roche and McConnell, Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1942
• Date: 01 January 1942
• Court: Supreme Court

(S.C.),

Young

and

Roche and McConnell, Ltd.

-Partial incapacity -Treatment of partial incapacity as total incapacity - Workman "so far recovered from his injury as to be fit for employment of a certain kind" -Workman's failure to obtain employment -Whether a consequence of his injury - Trade Union regulations preventing workman obtaining employment - Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934 (No. 9 of 1934), s. 24.

1. Sect. 24, sub-s. 1, of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934, provides: —"Subject to the provisions of this section if a workman, who has so far recovered from the injury as to be fit for employment of a certain kind, has failed to obtain employment and it appears to the Court either (a) that, having regard to all the circumstances, it is probable that the workman would, but for the continuing effects of the injury, be able to obtain work in the same grade in the same class of employment as before the accident; or (b) that his failure to obtain employment is a consequence, whether wholly or mainly, of the injury, the Court shall order that the workman's incapacity shall be treated as total incapacity resulting from the injury for such period, and subject to such conditions, as may be provided by the order, without prejudice, however, to the right of review conferred by this Act."The object of clause (a) of the above section is to secure to a workman, who has partially recovered, compensation on the footing of total incapacity, if it can be shown that, had he completely recovered, he would probably have obtained work in the same grade in the same class of employment as before the accident. So held by the Supreme Court, following Barstowe v. Ingham's Thornhill Collieries, Ltd.ELR[1934] A.C. 304 and Robert Addie & Sons, Ltd.v. McCrackenSC, [1937] S.C. (H.L.) 1. A workman sustained injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. He brought proceedings for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934. Evidence was given that he had "so far recovered from his injury as to be fit for employment of a certain kind." but that the Trade Union to which he belonged would not allow him to work except at the full rate of pay and that he was unable to obtain employment although he had made application to several firms. The Circuit...