HC Deb 13 December 1911 vol 32 cc2363-4

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention had been directed to the case of Rosie v. Mackay, 1910, reported in Session Cases, 714; and whether he would bring in a Bill to amend the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, providing that it should be competent to award a nominal sum of compensation when the judge who tried the case was of opinion that, owing to the injuries which the workman had sustained the workman might reasonably be expected at some later date to be totally or partially incapacitated for work in consequence of the injuries, although for the time being he might be able to earn the same rate of wages as he did before the accident?


I am aware of the decision referred to in the question. The point is one on which the English and Scottish Courts have taken different views; the English Court of Appeal having held that the judge has jurisdiction to make a suspensory award for the purpose of keeping alive the workman's claim for compensation in cases where incapacity is likely to recur, while the Scottish Court in the case mentioned has held that this cannot be done. The point can only be determined finally by a decision of the House of Lords. I am afraid I cannot give any promise to bring in legislation for the purpose of clearing up the point, but I will see that it is noted for consideration in connection with the next amending Bill.


asked the Attorney-General whether he was aware that lump sums awarded under the Workmen's Compensation Act and invested by order of the County Court were by the rules only allowed to be invested in the Post Office Savings Bank; and whether he could do anything to have such rules altered so that such sums could be invested in trustee securities or other stocks returning a fair rate of interest?


I will bring this matter to the attention of the Rule Committee of the County Court Judges.