Scottish Court of Session Decisions

In an arbitration under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1806 (6 Edw. VII, cap. 58), in the Sheriff Court at Edinburgh, in which Helen Wilson claimed compensation from the Rev. George Laing, the Sheriff-Substitute ( Guy) refused compensation, and at the request of the claimant stated a case for appeal.

The facts set forth were:—“The appellant was on 4th July 1808 in the employment of the respondent as housemaid at 17 Buckingham Terrace, Edinburgh. Prior to her employment with the respondent the appellant had suffered from defective eyes, and had had to undergo several surgical operations connected with them, the result of these operations being that the left eye had become practically blind, while the right eye, though weak, was a serviceable eye, and on said date enabled the appellant to perform her duties efficiently. On said date the appellant, in the course of her duties, was just leaving the drawing-room flat to ascend the stair to the nursery flat, preceded by her fellow-servant Nurse Emelie Fairlie, when she was struck on her right eye by an india-rubber toy air-ball. Said ball had been playfully thrown by the said Emelie Fairlie over her left shoulder in the direction of the appellant, whom she knew to be following her upon the stair. She threw the ball with the intention of striking the appellant on the back. She threw it for fun and did not think it would harm the appellant. The said ball was not accidentally dropped or let fall. As the result of the blow from said ball the appellant's right eye was so injured that she has almost completely lost her eyesight, and is wholly incapacitated for her work as a domestic servant.” On these facts the Sheriff-Substitute found that the accident to the appellant, though arising in the course of her employment, did not arise out of her employment.

The question of law for the opinion of the Court was—“Whether the accident to the appellant arose out of her employment within the meaning of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1806?”

Argued for the appellant—The accident occurred in the course of the employment. It occurred while the appellant was engaged in the performance of her duties, and was thus properly described as arising out of her employment— Challis v. London and South-Western Railway, [1905] 2 KB 154; M'Intyre v. Rodger & Company, December 1, 1903, 6 F. 176, 41 S.L.R. 107, distinguishing Falconer v. London and Glasgow Engineering and Iron Shipbuilding Company, Limited, February 23, 1901, 3 F. 564, 38 S.L.R. 381.

Counsel for the respondent were not called on.