Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: employers liability act 1938 Page 12 of about 63,085 results (0.120 seconds)

Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Shamaraya S/o B ...

Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi

..... then, as per the proviso, the policy shall not be required to cover liability in respect of the death, arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment, other than a liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 in respect of the death of, or bodily injury to, an employee engaged in driving the vehicle, or who is a conductor, if it is a public service vehicle or an employee ..... the object of the insistence on insurance under chapter xi of the act thus seems to be to compulsorily cover the liability relating to their person or properties of third parties and in respect of employees of the insured employer, the liability that may arise under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 in respect of the driver, the conductor and the one carried in a goods vehicle carrying goods. ..... as we understand section 147 (1) of the act, an insurance policy thereunder need not cover the liability in respect of death or injury arising out of and in the course of the employment of an employee of the person insured by the policy, unless it be a liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 in respect of a driver, also the conductor, in the case of a public service vehicle, and the one carried in the vehicle as owner of the goods or his representative, if it is a goods vehicle. .....

Great Northern Ry. Co. Vs. Wiles

Court : US Supreme Court

..... the facts, which involve the construction and application of the federal employers' liability act and the validity page 240 u. s. ..... employee or to confuse his judgment, and his duty is as clear as its performance is easy, and he knows not only the imminent danger of the situation, but also how it can be averted by complying with the rules of the employer, there is no justification for a comparison of negligences on the part of the employer and employee or the apportioning of their effect under the provision of the employers' liability act. ..... it was brought under the employers' liability act of april 22, 1908 (35 stat. 65, c. ..... to excuse its neglect in any way would cast immeasurable liability upon the railroads, and, what is of greater concern, remove security from the lives of those who travel upon them, and therefore all who are concerned with their operation, however high or low in function, ..... to excuse such neglect on the part of an employee of an interstate carrier would not only cast immeasurable liability on the carriers but remove security from those carried. ..... wiles was a freight brakeman in the employ of the railway company in interstate commerce, the company being an interstate common carrier. ..... causes not shown by the testimony, and the proportion of the carrier's negligence in causing the death of an employee was, in view of the failure of the employee to perform his duty and comply with the rules of the employer under such circumstances, reversible error. .....

Reading Co. Vs. Koons

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 58 certiorari to the supreme court of the state of pennsylvania syllabus section 6 of the employers' liability act, providing "[t]hat no action shall be maintained under this act unless commenced within two years from the day the cause of action accrued," is to be construed as allowing, in death cases, two years from the time of death, not two years from the appointment of ..... 60 review is whether, in an action for wrongful death brought under the federal employers' liability act, the two-year statute of limitations begins to run at the date of the death or at the date of the appointment of the ..... it is argued that, as it was provided by lord campbell's act that the period of limitation should run from the time of death, the omission of that phraseology from the employers' liability act indicates that it was the intention of congress that the statutory period should run from a different time -- namely, from the time of the ..... the federal employers' liability act imposes upon common carriers by railroad, engaged in interstate commerce, liability for the death of an employee employed in such commerce when the death results from the negligence of the carrier or its agents, and gives a right of action to the personal representative of the decedent for the benefit of the surviving ..... february 6, 1922, nearly seven years after the death, respondent brought the action now under review in the pennsylvania court of common pleas to establish a liability under the federal employers' liability act. .....

Stone Vs. New York, Chicago and St.L. R. Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 407 certiorari to the supreme court of missouri syllabus in this action brought in a state court under the federal employers' liability act, to recover damages for an injury suffered by petitioner while working as a member of a section crew removing old or worn crossties on respondent's railroad line, the issues of negligence and causation were peculiarly for the jury, and the ..... . congress could hardly have assumed when the federal employers' liability act of 1908 was enacted that this court must reverse the state judges merely because we and they differed, where difference was more than permissible, was inevitable, concerning whether or not a particular unique set of ..... .) in thus entrusting the enforcement of the federal employers' liability act to the state courts, it presupposed, as a generality, the competence of the judiciaries of the states, their professional capacity to enforce the act, and their self-ritical fairness toward its purposes ..... . in an action in a state court under the federal employers' liability act, the verdict was for the plaintiff ..... . 411 was adapted, but brutally unfit for the situations to which the federal employers' liability act requires that it be put ..... . the federal employers' liability act embodies the common law conception of negligence, subject to certain qualifications ..... . he brought this action for damages in the missouri courts under the federal employers' liability act, 35 stat .....

New India Assurance Company Ltd., Represented by Duly Constituted Atto ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2008ACJ2306; 2007(5)KarLJ306; 2007(5)AIRKarR91; AIR2007NOC2147

..... then, as par the proviso, the policy shall not be required to cover liability in respect of the death, arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment, other than a liability arising under workman's compensation act, 1923 in respect, of the death of, or bodily injury to, an employee engaged in driving the vehicle, or who is a conductor, if it is a public service vehicle or an employee being ..... the object of the insistence on insurance under chapter xi of the act thus a seems to be to compulsorily cover the liability relating to their person or properties of third parties and in respect of employees of the insured employer, the liability that may arise under the workmen's compensation act, 1923, in respect of the driver the conductor and the one carried in a goods vehicle carrying goods. ..... as we understand section 147(1) of the act, an insurance policy thereunder need not cover the liability in respect of death or injury arising out of and in the course of the employment of an employee of the person insured by the policy, unless, it be a liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 in respect of a driver, also the conductor, in the case of a public service vehicle, and the one carried in the vehicle as a owner of the goods or his representative, if it is a goods vehicle. .....

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Santro Devi and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2009ACJ570; 2009(1)AWC502(SC); 2009(2)MhLJ960(SC); 2008(16)SCALE136:2009AIRSCW6472009(1)LHSC74:2009(1)SCC(Cri)582:2009ACJ570

..... the proviso appended thereto reads as under:provided that a policy shall not be required-(i) to cover liability in respect of the death, arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment other than a liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 (8 of 1923) in respect of the death of, or bodily injury to, any such ..... that quantum of premium paid for renewal of the policy is in terms of the provisions of the insurance act, 1938.16. ..... then, as per the proviso, the policy shall not be required to cover liability in respect of the death, arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment, other than a liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 in respect of the death of, or bodily injury to, an employee engaged in driving the vehicle, or who is a conductor, if it is a ..... the object of the insistence on insurance under chapter xi of the act thus seems to be to compulsorily cover the liability relating to their person or properties of third parties and in respect of employees of the insured employer, the liability that may arise under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 in respect of the driver, the conductor and the one carried in .....

The Century Insurance Company, Limited Vs. Northern Ireland Road Trans ...

Court : House of Lords

..... and delivery of petrol in their tank lorries; (2) whether, if davison was the servant of the respondents, his act in lighting his cigarette was in the circumstances an act of negligence in the course of his employment in the respondents' service, involving the liability of the respondents to compensate the various parties whose property was injured by the explosion which resulted from davison's rash act, including catherwood, whose garage was damaged and whose car was destroyed, and the owners ..... the duty of the workman to his employer is so to conduct himself in doing his work as not negligently to cause damage either to the employer himself or his property or to third persons or their property, and thus to impose the same liability on the employer as if he had been doing the work himself and committed the negligent act. ..... but that last condition is no longer essential to fix liability on the employer (lloyd v. ..... was the admittedly careless act of davison in lighting a cigarette and throwing the match on the floor of the garage an act done in the course of his employment as such servant, for the consequences of which his master was responsible? ..... " we have only to consider in whose employment the man was at the time when the acts complained of were done, in this sense, that by the employer is meant the person who has a right at the moment to control the doing of the act". .....

St. Louis, I.M. and S. Ry. Co. Vs. Mcwhirter

Court : US Supreme Court

..... it be further conceded that the trial court held, and erred in holding, that there was enough in the evidence to warrant a finding that the locomotive engineer was negligent, so as to make the carrier liable under the employers' liability act, or held, erroneously, that there was enough to show a causal relation between the working overtime of mcwhirter and the disaster, so as to create a liability under the hours of service act. ..... 2939, 2) and upon the employers' liability act of april 22, 1908 (35 stat. 65, c. ..... however, let it be conceded for present purposes that the trial court erroneously instructed the jury that the effect of the violation of the hours of service act was to create an unconditional liability for an accident happening after the expiration of the sixteen-hour limit, and to render the carrier an insurer of the safety of the employee while working beyond the statutory time. ..... " giving to the views, these expressions by the court, their natural significance, there would seem to be little doubt that it was intended to hold that the effect of the violation of the hours of service act was to create an unconditional liability for all accidents happening during the period beyond the statutory time, irrespective of proof showing a connection between the accident and the working overtime. .....

Great Northern Ry. Co. Vs. Donaldson

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 121 error to the supreme court of the state of washington syllabus where the state trial and supreme courts have successively found sufficient evidence of negligence to sustain a verdict for plaintiff in an action under the employers' liability act, it is not the province of this court to weigh the conflicting evidence on the subject; it will go no farther than to ascertain that there is evidence supporting the verdict. ..... 913, is a "statute enacted for the safety of employees," within the meaning of 4 of the federal employers' liability act, which latter eliminates assumption of risk in cases where the violation of such a statute contributes to the injury or death of the employee. ..... thoms, deceased, brought suit in the superior court of snohomish county, washington, under the federal employers' liability act, to recover damages for injuries received which resulted in the death of vance h. ..... provided with fusible safety plugs and had an accumulation of scale, held that a request for an instruction stating that no safety statute was applicable and submitting the question of assumed risk was inconsistent with 4 of the employers' liability act and 2 of the boiler inspection ..... " the charge requested is inconsistent with the provisions of 4 of the federal employers' liability act and 2 of the boiler inspection act. ..... section 4 of the federal employers' liability act (35 stat. .....

Cortes Vs. Baltimore Insular Line, Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... administrator of a railroad engineer who by misadventure has fallen from his locomotive while the train is on a bridge has a cause of action under the federal employers' liability act because of the failure of the crew of the train to come to the rescue of their comrade. ..... 368 "negligence," within the purview of 33 of the merchant marine act, supplemented by the federal employers' liability act, for which that section gives a right of action by the seaman, if living, or by his ..... omission to furnish him with safe and suitable appliances, may have a remedy under the federal employers' liability act 1 (45 u.s.code 51), or at times under the safety appliance act 1 to 6 (45 u.s.code, 1 to 6), though the omission would not be actionable in the absence of a contract creating the employment. ..... the employers' liability act for the protection of the employees of common carriers by railroad gives ..... fact that the duty of master and of shipowner to furnish care and cure to a seaman in case of illness is a duty arising from and attached to the contractual relation of employment, for the breach of which the seaman has, under the general maritime law, a cause of action ex contractu, is not inconsistent with allowing him also, at his election, a statutory ..... act for the relief of seamen as expressing the will of congress that only the same defaults imposing liability upon carriers by rail shall impose liability ..... nor is liability escaped by appeal to the distinction between acts of omission, on the one .....