Carswell v. Sharpe and Others [1910] ScotLR 335 (08 February 1910)

Carswell v. Sharpe and Others [1910] ScotLR 335 (08 February 1910)

The deceased, though a part-owner, was employed as master by the managing owner and was not a partner or joint-adventurer; thus, he was a 'workman' under the Act and his dependants are entitled to compensation.

Citation
[1910] ScotLR 335
Parties
Pursuer/respondent: Mrs Robertina Fleming or Sharpe; Pursuer/respondent: Mrs Janet Aitken or Sharpe; Defender/appellant: John Carswell
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 February 1910
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Sheriff Court Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed; compensation awarded to respondents upheld
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Definition of Workman, Employer Liability, Co Ownership Vs Partnership, Maritime Employment
Employment Law Maritime Law Workmen's Compensation Definition of Workman Employer Liability Co Ownership Vs Partnership Maritime Employment

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Robertina Fleming or Sharpe

Pursuer/respondent

Mrs Janet Aitken or Sharpe

Pursuer/respondent

John Carswell

Defender/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Sheriff Court Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a co-owner of a ship employed as master by the managing owner is a 'workman' under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906
  2. 2 Whether part-ownership of the vessel bars dependants from claiming compensation
  3. 3 Whether the deceased was a partner or joint-adventurer with the managing owner

Ratio Decidendi

The deceased, though a part-owner, was employed as master by the managing owner and was not a partner or joint-adventurer; thus, he was a 'workman' under the Act and his dependants are entitled to compensation.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; compensation awarded to respondents upheld

Orders

  • First question (workman status) answered in the affirmative
  • Second and third questions (bar by part-ownership, partnership/joint-adventure) answered in the negative