BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
Scottish Court of Session Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Walker v. Olsen [1882] ScotLR 19_708 (15 June 1882) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1882/19SLR0708.html Cite as: [1882] SLR 19_708, [1882] ScotLR 19_708 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Page: 708↓
[Sheriff of Aberdeenshire.
A stevedore raised an action of damages in the Sheriff Court at Aberdeen against the master, on behalf of the owners, of a vessel on board of which he had been employed, in the following circumstances:—He was engaged in the hold along with another man in filling buckets or tubs with bones, which formed the cargo. These buckets were hauled up on deck and let down again when empty by means of a winch and gin or pulley, with a hook which passed through an iron thimble in a stock which was made fast to the trysailgaff at the height of twelve feet above the deck. A chain passed from the winch through the gin, but for about nineteen or twenty feet at the end which went down into the hold the communication was of rope. At the close of the day's work, when the last bucket had descended, to remain there till work was resumed next day, the rope became unhooked from the tub—it was alleged, by the violence with which it was let down and bumped against the bottom of the hold—and before the pursuer's fellow-workman could seize it, or give notice to the mate above, whose duty it then was to have it secured to the deck, ran violently through the gin, which, in some way not satisfactorily explained, came loose,
Page: 709↓
with the result that the whole gearing fell into the hold and struck the pursuer, who was then in the act of ascending the ladder to the deck, inflicting serious injuries. Held— reversing the judgment of the Sheriff ( Guthrie Smith), and reverting to that of the Sheriff-Substitute ( Combie Thomson)—that in respect it was not shown that there had been any unusual or abnormal strain on the tackle, and no satisfactory explanation was forthcoming of how it came to give way, the fact of the accident occurring raised a prima facie presumption, which the defender's evidence had not displaced, that the tackle was insufficient and defective, and that the pursuer was entitled to damages.
Counsel for Pursuer (Appellant)— Rhind—Young. Agents— Begg & Murray, Solicitors.
Counsel for Defender (Respondent)— Mackintosh— Shaw. Agent— R. C. Gray, S.S.C.