Labour Officer for Rajpathi v Fiji Sugar Corporation Ltd [1985] FijiLawRp 21; [1985] 31 FLR 118 (8 November 1985)

[1985] 31 FLR 118

COURT OF APPEAL OF FIJI

Civil Jurisdiction

THE LABOUR OFFICER AND ON BEHALF OF RAJPATHI

(WIDOW), BISUN DEO (SON), ANIL DEO (SON), DEO RAM (SON), KAMAL KALA (DAUGHTER) AND HARISH CHAND DEO (GRANDSON) OF SUKHU (s/o BUDHU SINGH), DECEASED

v

FIJI SUGAR CORPORATION LIMITED

Roper, J. A., Mishra, J. A.,O'Regan, J. A.

Date of Hearing: 24 October 1985
Date of Judgment: 8 November 1985

Workmen's Compensation − Established atherosclerosis − coronary occlusion − no evidence of stress mental or physical in work − no evidence of injury which arose out of employment − no evidence to justify shifting of onus − distinction between "accident" and "injury" − "stress " − "accident" in as occlusion − "injury in as "infarct"

S. P. Sharma & A. Abbas for Appellant
D. C. Maharaj & K. C. Chaganlal for Respondent

Appeal against a dismissal on 10 May 1985 by the Supreme Court of an appeal to it from the Magistrate's Court which on 28 September, 1983 had found in favour of the respondent (defendant) in a claim of workmen's compensation.

Deceased had been employed by the defendant for some 30 years, finally as a launch captain. At about 4 a.m. on 22 August 1980 with a crew of two he took the launch with barges in tow from Labasa to Malau. There the vessels were secured and unloaded. The deceased took no part in this activity. Later, when he was sitting on the jetty he collapsed, fell to the ground and was taken to the hospital to which he was admitted about 10 a.m. He was pronounced dead shortly afterwards.

Medical evidence was that the deceased had an advanced condition of atherosclerosis from which, apparently, he had suffered for many years. This had given rise to a coronary occlusion which, in turn caused a fatal myorcardial infarction.

It was conceded before the Judge inter alia that the deceased had:

" .......suffered personal injury which occurred during the course of his employment.

The sole issue for decision therefore is whether the deceased suffered personal injury by an accident which arose out of his employment."

Here the Court of Appeal observed the accident was the coronary occlusion and the injury the infarct. The appellant argued that it was open on the evidence for the Magistrate to have found deceased had been under stress resulting from his duties.