Smith v. Fife Coal Co. Ltd [1913] ScotLR 455 (21 February 1913)

Smith v. Fife Coal Co. Ltd [1913] ScotLR 455 (21 February 1913)

The respondent was injured while performing a task (coupling the cable to the charge) that was expressly reserved by statutory regulation to the shot-firer and outside the scope of his employment as a miner. The accident did not arise out of and in the course of his employment, and he was not entitled to compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906.

Citation
[1913] ScotLR 455
Parties
Respondent: James Smith; Appellants: Fife Coal Company Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 February 1913
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Way of Stated Case From Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Court of Session Inner House Second Division Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; arbitrator's award recalled; claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Scope of Employment, Statutory Breach, Master and Servant, Industrial Accidents
Employment Law Statutory Compensation Workmen's Compensation Scope of Employment Statutory Breach Master and Servant Industrial Accidents

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 3 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Smith

Respondent

Fife Coal Company Limited

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal by Way of Stated Case From Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Court of Session Inner House Second Division Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accident to the respondent arose out of and in the course of his employment under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 when he was injured while performing a duty reserved by statutory rule to another employee (shot-firer)

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent was injured while performing a task (coupling the cable to the charge) that was expressly reserved by statutory regulation to the shot-firer and outside the scope of his employment as a miner. The accident did not arise out of and in the course of his employment, and he was not entitled to compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; arbitrator's award recalled; claim dismissed.

Orders

  • The question of law answered in the negative.
  • Award of the arbitrator recalled.