O'Hara v. The Cadzow Coal Co., Ltd [1903] ScotLR 40_355 (06 February 1903)

O'Hara v. The Cadzow Coal Co., Ltd [1903] ScotLR 40_355 (06 February 1903)

The deceased was in breach of Rule 9 by failing to set sprags when there was room, and this breach constituted serious and wilful misconduct under the Act, disentitling his representatives to compensation.

Citation
[1903] ScotLR 40_355
Parties
Claimant and Respondent: Mrs Catherine O'Brien or O'Hara, widow of James O'Hara, miner; Appellants: The Cadzow Coal Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 February 1903
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 / Inner House, Court of Session, Second Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed; compensation disallowed
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Serious and Wilful Misconduct, Statutory Interpretation, Coal Mines Regulation
Labour Law Personal Injury Statutory Compensation Workmen's Compensation Serious and Wilful Misconduct Statutory Interpretation Coal Mines Regulation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Catherine O'Brien or O'Hara, widow of James O'Hara, miner

Claimant and Respondent

The Cadzow Coal Company, Limited

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 / Inner House, Court of Session, Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the deceased was in breach of additional special rule No. 9 of the Coal Mines Regulation Act 1887
  2. 2 Whether the injury was attributable to his serious and wilful misconduct under sec. 1(2)(c) of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Ratio Decidendi

The deceased was in breach of Rule 9 by failing to set sprags when there was room, and this breach constituted serious and wilful misconduct under the Act, disentitling his representatives to compensation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; compensation disallowed

Orders

  • The question as amended answered in the affirmative: the deceased was in breach of Rule 9 and his injury was attributable to his serious and wilful misconduct; compensation to the claimant and her children is disallowed.