- Created by: Former Member
- Created on: 02-12-19 19:33
The appellant, a workman in the respondents' factory, sustained injuries in the course of his employment owing to the failure of the respondents to fence a machine. He lost three fingers and was unable to return to work for 6 months. Shortly after the accident the respondents offered him, and he accepted, a weekly sum of money and he signed receipts for weekly payments made under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1925. These sums were paid to him throughout the period of his unemployment. The appellant then brought an action against the respondents claiming damages for breach of their statutory duty.
It was found as a fact that, although the appellant could not be said to have exercised his option under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1925, s 29(1), since he did not know of his right to elect, nevertheless he had received the payments made to him by the respondents as…