Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

evidence so taken may be used before him as part of the evidence on which to base his award.67 And the British Columbia arbitration act (B. C. Rev. Stat. 1897, chap. 9) applies to an award under the workmen's compensation act 1902; and a motion to set aside the award may be made under the former act.68 Under this act he had power to permit amendments to the pleadings.69 But he does not have power to set aside a judgment filed in his court by the duly appointed arbitrator; this does not amount to a rectification of the register.70 An arbitrator is not required to seal his award.71 And he has no power to submit a question of law to the judge after he has made his award.72

3. Appeals.

An appeal from the decision of the county court judge upon points of law arising under the act lies to the court of appeal, and not to the divisional court.73 But if the county court judge refuses to entertain jurisdiction of the case under the act, an appeal from such refusal lies

67 Bodner V. West Canadian Colleries (1912) 8 D. L. R. (Alberta) 462, 22 West. L. Rep. (Can.) 765.

68 Disourdi v. Sullivan Group Min. Co. (1909) 14 B. C. 241 (writ of prohibition refused).

Subsection 3 of § 2 of the workmen's compensation act expressly confers upon an arbitrator jurisdiction to settle "any question as to whether the employment is one to which this act applies;" and the only way to review the arbitrator's finding thereon is by means of a case submitted under §4 of the second schedule. Basanta v. Canadian P. R. Co. (1911) 16 B. C. 304.

to the divisional court, and not to the court of appeal.7

74

Any appeal from an arbitrator appointed under schedule II. ¶¶ 2 or 3, lies to the county court judge, and not to the court of appeal.75 An appeal lies to the county court judge qua judge, from an order of the registrar, granting leave to issue execution in a case where there was an agreement to pay compensation during total incapacity, and the employer claimed that the incapacity had ceased.76

The time for appeal from an award of the arbitrator runs from the time the award was perfected.77 There is no way by which a workman who has failed to appeal from a decision for an award which was to terminate at a specific time in the future can, after such time, have his case reviewed.78 The time for appealing will be extended where the county court judge had not furnished the applicant with a copy of his note within the time allowed for appealing, although he had been requested to do so upon several occasions.79

The court of appeal has no jurisdiction

74 From the refusal of a county court judge to entertain jurisdiction of an application to review an award made by a committee, an appeal lies to the divisional court, and not to the court of appeal. Howarth v. Samuelson (1906) 104 L. T. N. S. (Eng.) 907, 4 B. W. C. C. 287.

In Rex v. Templer [1912] 1 K. B. (Eng.) 351, 81 L. J. K. B. N. S. 399, 105 L. T. N. S. 905, 28 Times L. R. 146, 132 L. T. Jo. 203, 5 B. W. C. C. 242, an appeal from the decision of the county court judge that he had no jurisdiction to review an award by a committee representing the employers and workmen was passed upon by the divisional

69 Moore v. Crow's Nest Pass Coal Co. court. (1910) 15 B. C. 391, 4 B. W. C. C. 451.

70 British Columbia Copper Co. v. MeKittrick (1913) 18 B. C. 129, 7 B. W. C. C. 1037.

71 Re Lewis (1913) 18 B. C. 329, 7 B. W. C. C. 1038.

72 (B. C.) Ibid.

73 An appeal from an order made by the county court judge upon a matter referred to him by the registrar under sub-paragraph d of 9 of the second schedule lies directly to the court of appeal, and not to the divisional court. Bonney v. Hoyle [1914] 2 K. B. (Eng.) 257, 83 L. J. K. B. N. S. 541, 110 L. T. N. S. 729, 136 L. T. Jo. 376, 30 Times L. R. 280, 58 Sol. Jo. 268, [1914] W. N. 43, 12 L. G. R. 358, 7 B. W. C. C. 168.

An appeal from an order of the county court judge, which wrongfully delegates his duty of taking evidence, lies to the court of appeal, and not to the divisional court. Taylor v. Cripps [1914] 3 K. B. (Eng.) 989, 83 L. J. K. B. N. S. 1538, 7 B. W. C. C. 623, 30 Times L. R. 616.

75 Gray v. Southend Corp. [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 393, 6 B. W. C. C. 932. The workman applied to the court of appeal to extend time for appealing from the ruling of an appointed arbitrator.

The only method of reviewing the decision of an arbitrator under $ 2 of the 24 schedule is by submission of a point of law to the county judge, no appeal lying directly to the court of appeal. Gibson v. Wormald [1904] 2 K. B. (Eng.) 40, 73 L. J. K. B. N. S. 491, 68 J. P. 382, 52 Week. Rep. 661, 91 L. T. N. S. 7, 20 Times L. R. 452.

76 Warren v. Roxburgh (1912) 106 L. T N. S. (Eng.) 555, 5 B. W. C. C. 263.

77 Clayton v. Jones Sewing Mach. Co. [1908] W. N. (Eng.) 253.

78 Evans v. Barrow Haematite Steel Co. (1914) 7 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 681.

79 Rogers v. Metropolitan Borough (1913) 7 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 10.

[ocr errors]

over questions of fact,80 unless there is no evidence to sustain the finding of the arbitrator.81 An appeal on the points of law, not taken in courts below, will be dismissed.82 If no suspensory award is asked for at the arbitration at which the compensation is terminated, an appeal upon the ground that such an award should have been made cannot be entertained.8 83 The court of appeal has no

80 Nelson v. Allan Bros. [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. 532, 50 Scot. L. R. 820, 6 B. W. C. C. 853; Powell v. Crow's Nest Pass Coal Co. (1915) 23 D. L. R. (B. C.) 57.

The condition of a workman is a question of fact, and the conclusion of the arbiter will not be disturbed. Turner v. Bell (1910) 4 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 63. An appeal will not lie to the court of appeal under (4), against the refusal of the county court judge to direct insurers to pay insurance money into the Postoffice Savings Bank, in accordance with the provisions of subs. 1 of § 5 of the act. Leech v. Life & Health Assur. Asso. [1901] 1 K. B. (Eng.) 707, 70 L. J. K. B. N. S. 544, 49 Week. Rep. 482, 84 L. T. N. S. 414, 17 Times L. R. 354.

And see Rigby v. Cox [1904] 1 K. B. (Eng.) 358, 73 L. J. K. B. N. S. 80, 68 J. P. 195, 52 Week. Rep. 195, 89 L. T. N. S. 717, 20 Times L. R. 136 (no appeal against refusal of county judge to direct a review of taxation of costs).

There is no appeal in proceedings under the Alberta act from the district court judge except on questions of law. Cargeme v. Alberta Coal & Min. Co. (1912) 6 D. L. R. (Alberta) 231, 22 West. L. Rep. (Can.) 68.

Under the British Columbia act, a judge of the supreme court has no jurisdiction to review the award or remit it to the arbitrator, in the absence of submission by the arbitrator of a question of law. Cozoff v. Welch (1914; C. C.) 7 B. W. C. C. (B. C.) 1064.

Upon the hearing of an interlocutory application by the employer for an order that the workman should give particulars as to his incapacity, the county court judge may refuse to hear the managing clerk of the solicitor on the record, although the clerk himself is an admitted solicitor. Rogers v. Metropolitan Borough [1914] W. N. (Eng.) 279, 58 Sol. Jo. 656, 7 B. W. C. C. 432.

The filing of the county court judge that there was no change of circumstances upon which a review could be based shall not be disturbed by the court of appeal, if there is any evidence to support it. Northeastern Marine Enginering Co. v. Davison [1915] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 65, 8 B. W. C. C. 248.

81 Wheeler v. Dawson [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 59, 5 B. W. C. C. 645.

The court has no jurisdiction to set aside an award on the finding of fact if there is any evidence to support such finding, how

jurisdiction to grant a declaration of liability where that question has not been passed upon by the county court judge.84 A new trial will not be granted to the workman on the ground of surprise, where the defense was set up at the hearing and no application was there made for an adjournment.85

The limitations of the powers of the court of appeal, as defined by ¶ (4), are ever much the court may disagree with it. Woods v. Wilson [1915] W. N. (Eng.) 109, 84 L. J. K. B. N. S. 1067, 31 Times L. R. 273, 59 Sol. Jo. 348, 8 B. W. C. C. 288.

An award founded solely on a statement made by the deceased workman to a fellow workman as to the cause of his injury will be set aside. Wolsey v. Pethick Bros. (1908) 1 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 411.

Where a medical referee found that the workman's condition was such that he was fit to return to his work, and that he had recovered from his incapacity, and the sheriff substitute found that the workman had failed to discharge the onus of proving that he had not recovered his wage-earning capacity, and ended the compensation, the question is one of fact for the arbitrator and his conclusion will not be disturbed on appeal. Jones v. Anderson (H. L.) [1914] W. N. (Eng.) 432, 31 Times L. R. 76, 59 Sol. Jo. 159, 84 L. J. P. C. N. S. 47, 112 L. T. N. S. 225. The Lord Chancellor observed that the reward of an arbitrator under the act would only be interfered with if it was wrong in law, or was made under such circumstances that the House of Lords was of the opinion that there was no evidence upon which the arbitrator could act.

Where an award terminating compensation is made by an arbitrator, the House of Lords will interfere only when the award is wrong in law on its face, or where, in the opinion of the House, there is no evidence upon which the arbitrator could find as he did. (Eng.) Ibid.

82 Payne v. Clifton (1910) 3 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 439.

If the county court judge committed error in allowing a medical assessor to examine a workman in his private room, such error cannot be considered on appeal, in the absence of an objection made at the time. Smith v. Foster [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 420, 6 B. W. C. C. 499.

83 Maunder v. Hancock (1914) 7 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 648.

84 Harlock v. The Coquet [1914] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 75, 7 B. W. C. C. 88.

85 A workman is not entitled to a new trial upon the ground of surprise where the matter was brought up at the trial and no application was made for an adjournment, although this ground was not raised on the case as it was launched, or covered by the answer of the respondent. Rocca v. Jones [1914] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 34, 7 B. W. C. C. 101, 6 N. C. C. A. 624.

[ocr errors]

indicated by the following remark of Smith, L. J.: "In cases under this act, as in appeals generally from county courts, questions of fact are not the subject of appeal. The county court judge has found the facts and has relegated them to us, and we have to decide any question of law arising on them." 86 But, under the local court act of Western Australia (4 Edw. VII. No. 51), an appeal lies to the supreme court on all points, both of law and of fact, and the appeal is in substance a rehearing.8

87

It is the duty of the county court judge when sitting as an arbitrator to state the grounds of his decision,88 and the court of appeal will remit to the county court judge, to be reheard by him, a case in which the note made by the judge does not show whether he found that the accident was in the scope of the employment, or whether there was wilful misconduct, or whether the injuries were permanent.89 A new trial must be had where the arbitrator did not bring out the real facts in the case, so that the court of appeal could determine that

86 Smith v. Lancashire & Y. R. Co. [1899] 1 Q. B. (Eng.) 141.

87 Federal Gold Mine v. Ennor (1910; H. C. Austr.) 13 C. L. R. (Austr.) 276.

88 Marshall v. Price (1914) 30 Times L. R. (Eng.) 248.

The proper course for an arbiter in stating a case is for him to find not only that the deceased met his death by accident while in the employment of the defendant, but to go further and find as a fact whether or not that accident arose out of and in the course of that employment; that the deceased was guilty or not guilty of serious or wilful misconduct or serious neglect; and then allow or disallow compensation, as the case may be. Armstrong v. St. Eugene Min. Co. (1908) 13 B. C. 385, 1 B. W. C. C. 427.

89 Walsh v. Scanlan (1914) 48 Ir. Law Times, 234, 8 B. W. C. C. 414. 90 Shaw V. Greenacres Spinning Co. (1915) 8 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 35.

91 Rayman v. Fields (1910) 102 L. T N. S. (Eng.) 154, 26 Times L. R. 274, 3 B. W. C. C. 119; Wright v. Sneyd Collieries (1915) 84 L. J. K. B. N. S. (Eng.) 1332.

92 Griffiths v. Wynnstay Collieries Co. (1909) 2 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 450.

There must be a new trial where the county court judge fails to make note of the evidence upon which he forms his conclusion. Taylor v. Ward (1914) 7 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 441.

93 Sambrook v. New Sharlston Collieries Co. (1914) 7 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 728.

94 Where, upon the hearing of an application for compensation, the employers relied upon three defenses, namely, that the accident did not arise out of the employment, that the workman was not suffering

[ocr errors]

a proper award had been made.90 The county court judge must make notes of the evidence or the case will not be considered on appeal,91 and it will be sent back for a new trial.92 There must be a rehearing where the county court judge makes two conflicting findings, neither of which is supported by the evidence,93 and where there was an award in favor of the employer, granted upon points upon which the arbitrator refused to hear the counsel for the applicant.94

A notice of appeal from the dismissal of an application to review must state the grounds of appeal; 95 and where there is no point of law in the notice of appeal, the appeal will be dismissed.96

In a Scotch case decided under the act of 1897, it was held that the acts of the sheriff in respect to the recording of the agreement were ministerial acts, and therefore not appealable.97 But a different rule has been laid down in the later Scotch cases,98 and by the English courts.99 If the arbitrator does entertain a petition to rectify a recorded agreement, he is deemed to be acting from injury by accident, but as the result of his own neglect, and third, that notice had not been given as soon as practicable, and the deputy judge directed counsel for the workman to deal only with the question of notice in his reply, and in his award the deputy judge decided the first two points in favor of the employers, but did not decide the third question, the case was sent back for a rehearing. Silk v. Isle of Thanet Rural Dist. Council (1913) 6 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 539.

95 Barton v. Scott (1910) 4 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 15.

96 Goff v. Airds (1912) 5 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 277.

97 In Binning v. Easton [1906-07] S. C. (Scot.) 406, it was held that the granting or rejecting by a sheriff of a warrant for the recording of an agreement concerning the payment of compensation was a ministerial act, and consequently could not be appealed.

98 A decision of the sheriff as to whether a memorandum of an agreement fixing the amount of compensation shall be recorded is a decision qua arbiter, not merely a ministerial act, and therefore subject to appeal. Addie v. Coakley [1909] S. C. 545, 46 Scot. L. R. 408, distinguishing Binning v. Easton (1906) 8 Sc. Sess. Cas. 5th series (Scot.) 407,-a decision under the act of 1897.

The act of the sheriff in recording a memorandum of agreement is a judicial act. Brown v. Orr [1909-10] S. C. (Scot.) 526.

99 In Johnston v. Mew, L. & Co. (1907) 98 L. T. N. S. (Eng.) 517, 24 Times L. R. 175, 1 B. W. C. C. 133, the court refused to follow the decision in the Binning Case, and

judicially and his judgment is subject to review.1

and sufficiency of evidence in the proceedings before the arbitrator will be found in the note below.5

A witness giving false testimony on an arbitration is guilty of perjury, since such proceedings are judicial.6

4. Costs.

See also ante, 82.

An appeal lies under schedule 2, clause 4, of the act of 1906, from a decision of the county court judge upon the question whether an applicant was bound by the provisions of a certified scheme entered into under the act of 1897, but not recertified after the passage of the Under ¶ 7, the costs to be awarded are act of 1906.2 If an award is made and discretionary with the committee, arbione of the parties takes advantage of trator, or county court judge, subject to it, it cannot thereafter move to have the the rules of the court. The award of award set aside. So, where an appli- costs being discretionary, the decisions cant has accepted payments of compen- in regard thereto are naturally dependsation under an award, he cannot sub-ent to a great extent upon the particsequently appeal from a part of the ular facts and circumstances of each order relating to the costs.* case. Ordinarily the awarding of costs

3

A few cases involving the admission is considered as a question for the arbiit was held that the order of a county | Jessop v. Maclay (1911) 5 B. W. C. C. court judge to register an agreement was (Eng.) 139. a judicial act, and therefore appealable.

The decision of the county court judge that there was an implied agreement between the parties, and his direction that a memorandum thereof be filed, is a judicial proceeding which is appealable. Johnson | v. Mew, L. & Co. (Eng.) supra.

1 Hughes v. Thistle Chemical Co. [190607] S. C. (Scot.) 607.

2 Moss v. Great Eastern R. Co. [1909] 2 K. B. (Eng.) 274, 78 L. J. K. B. N. S. 1048, 100 L. T. N. S. 747, 25 Times L. R. 466, 2 B. W. C. C. 168.

3 Jones v. Winder [1914] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 38, 7 B. W. C. C. 204. In this case the arbitrator found that incapacity had ceased, but made an award for the period of time from the day when the payments had ceased to the date when he found the incapacity to have ceased.

4 Johnson v. Newton Fire Extinguisher Co. [1913] 2 K. B. (Eng.) 111, 82 L. J. K. B. N. S. 541, 108 L. T. N. S. 360, [1913] W. N. 37, [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. 352, 6 B. W. C. C. 202.

Where a workman had received compensation under an award of the county court judge which was made in accordance with an offer of the employer, and which provided that a certain sum per week should be deducted from the compensation for the costs to the employer, the workman cannot appeal upon the ground that the judge had no power to order the costs to be deducted from the compensation. Stroewer V. Aerogen Gas Co. [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 578, 6 B. W. C. C. 576.

5 It is error for the county court judge to admit statements made by a deceased workman to his wife as to the cause of injury from which he died, although he only admitted them for use, if necessary, in the appellate court. Smith v. Hardman [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 459, 6 B. W. C. C. 719.

It is error for the county court judge to go on with a case without waiting for depositions necessary for the employers in their case from witnesses who were abroad.

Statements as to the cause of the injury, made in the absence of the employer by a workman to his wife and to his doctor, are not admissible to prove an accident. Donaghy v. Ulster Spinning Co. (1912) 46 Ir. Law Times, 33, [1912] W. C. Rep. 183, as cited in Butterworths' Dig. 1912, p. 432.

The appellate court will not open up the closed proof and remit to the arbiter to take evidence of a witness not called at the hearing, where the court was satisfied with the case stated by the sheriff. Miller v. North British Locomotive Co. [1909] S. C. 698, 46 Scot. L. R. 755, 2 B. W. C. C. 80.

An appeal will not be sustained merely because the arbiter admitted evidence after he had expressed a view on the case. Peters v. The Argol (1912) 5 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 414.

The county court judge cannot dismiss a workman's application for arbitration on the ground that there was not sufficient evidence of an accident, where the employer's answer did not traverse the allegations as to the accident. Rudge v. Young (1914), 7 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 406.

In Johnson v. Oceanic Steam Nav. Co. [1912] W. C. Rep. (Eng.) 162, 5 B. W. C. C. 322, the court of appeal refused to pass upon the question whether the reports which the employer had concerning the accident, furnished to the employer by the physician, were privileged.

Error in the admission of evidence will not require a new trial, where there is sufficient competent evidence to support the judge's finding. Beare v. Garrod (1915) 8 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 474.

6 Rex v. Crossley (Ct. Crim. App.) [1909] 1 K. B. (Eng.) 411, 78 L. J. K. B. N. S. 299, 100 L. T. N. S. 463, 25 Times L. R. 225, 73 J. P. 119, 53 Sol. Jo. 214, 22 Cox, C. C. 40.

7 A county court judge has no jurisdiction to give to the register a direction applicable to all cases, that the costs of all applications to review the weekly payments shall be treated as though the application were

trator, and the court will not interfere employer where the applicant secures a in the absence of special circumstances.8 greater award than the employer had The costs should not be awarded to the offered him.9 And costs cannot prop

a mere interlocutory application in the matter of the original arbitration, and not as an original arbitration or proceeding. Rigby v. Cox [1904] 2 K. B. (Eng.) 208, 73 L. J. K. B. N. S. 690, 91 L. T. N. S. 72, 20 Times L. R. 461, 68 J. P. 385.

No costs were awarded to either party where the award was, upon the application of the employer, cut down from $385 to $235. Bruno v. International Coal & Coke Co. (1913) 7 B. W. C. C. (Alberta) 1033. Where, upon a request for arbitration, the arbitrator finds for the employers, he may include in the costs awarded the qualifying fee of the doctor, although the examination took place before the filing of the request for arbitration. Jones v. Davies [1914] 3 K. B. (Eng.) 549, [1914] W. N. 280, 137 L. T. Jo. 211, 83 L. J. K. B. N. S. 1531, 7 B. W. C. C. 488.

The county court judge has no jurisdiction to allow, as a set-off against costs awarded the applicant on the arbitration, the costs granted to the employer on a prior appeal from interlocutory orders of the county court judge. Sutton v. Great Northern R. Co. (1910) 3 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 160.

The employer is entitled to the fees of certain witnesses who had testified as experts that there was no accident, where the county court judge found that there was an accident, but that no incapacity had resulted therefrom, and consequently found for the employers. Finlayson v. The Clinton (1914) 7 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 710. The ground upon which the county court judge had held that the employer was not entitled to costs for these witnesses was that they had gone out of their way and had assumed the functions of the court in testifying that there was no accident, and not upon the ground that they had testified as to a point upon which the employers had failed.

The county court has jurisdiction to order a workman to pay the employers' costs where the employer had stopped compensation, alleging that the workman was completely recovered, but, upon the workman's bringing proceedings, paid a sum into court which they admitted was due to the workman, but which had not been paid, through an oversight. Thomas v. Cory Bros. (1911) 5 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 5.

The county court judge has no jurisdiction to order the employer to pay costs in a case where the employer and the workman had agreed upon a certain sum to be paid in redemption of the weekly payment, but the workman's parents subsequently objected to the recording of the agreement on the ground that the amount was inadequate, while the county court judge ordered the agreement to be recorded but further ordered the employer to pay the costs. Reed v. The Wymeric (1914) 7 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 421.

The employers are entitled to withdraw an appeal to the court of appeal, and, upon the refusal of the workman to permit the appeal to be withdrawn, the court of appeal will grant the application made to it by the employers to withdraw the appeal, and the cost of the application will be offset against the costs to which the workman was entitled up to the time of the appeal. Stephens v. Vickers [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. (Eng.) 454, 6 B. W. C. C. 469.

It is within the discretion of the county court judge to direct that the employer pay the costs of proceedings instituted to compel him to pay compensation, which he had agreed to, but which he refused to pay until letters of administration were taken out by the widow. Clatworthy v. Green (1902) 50 Week. Rep. (Eng.) 610, 82 L. T. N. S. 702, 66 J. P. 596, 18 Times L. R. 641.

Where liability was admitted and the amount agreed upon, costs to the counsel for applicant were allowed for attending the hearing at which the terms of the agreement and the division of the money between the widow and daughter were sanctioned by the court. Coleman v. Southeastern R. Co. (1899; C. C.) 1 W. C. C. (Eng.) 151.

It is competent for the county court judge to refuse to make any order for costs in a case in which he dismissed an application for the termination of weekly payments upon the ground that the workman refused to submit himself to all examination under an anesthetic, where the county court judge believed that the difficulty had arisen solely from the workman's own conduct. Lowestoft Corp. v. Aldridge (1912) 5 B. W. C. C. (Eng.) 329.

In M'Laughlin v. Wemyss Coal Co. [1912] W. C. Rep. 67, 49 Scot. L. R. 202, the court fixed a fee at 3 guineas where a party had been awarded costs of a stated case.

Where the respondents never disputed their liability to pay full compensation, and had paid it and were continuing to pay it; they were entitled to have a memorandum of the implied agreement registered notwithstanding a request for arbitration had been filed; and where, under such request, an award with costs is made, an appeal must be allowed. Jones v. Great Central R. Co. (1901) 4 W. C. C. (Eng.) 23.

8 In the absence of special circumstances, the court of appeal has no jurisdiction to vary the order of the county court judge, who, upon awarding compensation to the workman, refused to set off the costs of the employer from a successful appeal from a prior order granting compensation. Barnett v. Port of London Authority (1913) 108 L. T. N. S. (Eng.) 944, 82 L. J. K. B. N. S. 918, 57 Sol. Jo. 577, [1913] W. C. & Ins. Rep. 414, 6 B. W. C. C. 466.

9 It it error for the county court judge to award costs to the employer after a sum was paid into court, where he had awarded

« AnteriorContinuar »