Noguera v Velasquez

• Jurisdiction: Belize
• Court: Court of Appeal (Belize)
• Judge: Dickson, C.J.
• Judgment Date: 15 February 1974
• Neutral Citation: BZ 1974 CA 8
• Docket Number: Civil Appeal No. 43
• Date: 15 February 1974

Court of Appeal

Dickson, C.J.

Civil Appeal No. 43

Noguera

and

Velasquez

J.C. Gray for appellant

I.appellant G. Peera amicus curiae for respondent

Industrial Law - Workmen's Compensation — Dependants — Computation of Awards

Facts: Finding that respondent was wife of deceased workman and a dependant — No direct evidence before magistrate of weekly earnings of deceased

Held: Necessary to look at wages of other employees as a guideline in computing the award — s. 11(1) Workmen's Compensation Ordinance followed — Appeal dismissed.

1 This is an appeal from a decision of the Circuit Magistrate sitting in the Corozal Magisterial District, given on 23rd July, 1970, in an application made under the Workmen's Compensation Ordinance, 1959 by Rosalia Montejo Velasquez the respondent in this appeal. The trial Magistrate ordered the appellant to pay to the respondent the sum of $5,500 compensation for the death of her husband Rosendo Velasquez and $143.00 costs.

2 The facts in this case as presented before the Magistrate in evidence is substantially the same as in the judgment delivered earlier this morning, in Appeal No. 44 Jaime Noguera and Felipa Galan de Aguilar, that is to say, as regards the date, place, manner and circumstances surrounding his death. Mr. Gray, at the hearing of this Appeal rightly conceded that the argument for the appellant in the instant case is the as that in Appeal No. 44 (Supra) except for two points: First, whether the figure which the Magistrate awarded as compensation is correct; and secondly, whether respondent in this Appeal is a dependant. The Magistrate's decision reads:

“At the conclusion of the evidence taken in this matter of an application from Rosalia Velasquez, for Compensation due for the death of her husband while he was in the employment of the respondents Jaime Noguera and Vildo Marin, I was perfectly satisfied that the following facts were completely substantiated by evidence:

• a) The applicant, Rosalia Velasquez, is the wife of the deceased, Rosendo Velasquez. She and her children were solely dependent upon the deceased, and she therefore is legally entitled to claim Compensation due as a result of his death.

• b) Rosendo Velasquez, up to and at the time of his death on the 16th April, 1969, was in the employment of Mr. Jaime Noguera, as a cane cutter, and was only loaned to Mr. Vildo Marin for the purpose of working in Mr. Marin's cane field,

• c) Rosendo Velasquez met his death as a result of an accident involving the Land Rover driven by Mr. Vildo Marin, in which he Velasquez was travelling on the direct order of his substantive employer, Jaime Noguera.

• d) As a direct admission that he was the employer, Mr. Noguera himself paid Luis Aguilar and Pedro Graviel Santiago, for work done at Marin's cane field along with Rosendo Velasquez on the day previous to the accident. Had Marin been responsible for the workmen being there on the 15th, Noguera would not have paid the wages for that day. The evidence of Aguilar and Santiago also shows that the workers went along with Marin, on a direct order from Noguera, and there was further evidence of Noguera's knowledge of his responsibility for the death of Rosendo Velasquez, by his admission to Lloyd Hepburn at the hospital, and his action in giving Velasquez' widow the sum of $200.00 in cash.

• e) The amount of $5,500.00 claimed by the applicant, is a sum prescribed by law.

Acting on the evidence presented in this matter, therefore, I am completely satisfied that Jaime Noguera was the person responsible and liable to pay to the, applicant, Rosalia Velasquez, the sum of $5,500.00 claimed by her as Compensation for the death of her husband, Rosendo Velasquez, which occurred while he was in the employment of Jaime Noguera.

I do not consider Vildo Marin as being liable, as in my opinion, the workers could have been recalled from Marin's influence at any time, by Jaime Noguera, should he have so desired, and Noguera therefore exercised direct control over them, as their employer.

I therefore ordered Jaime Noguera to pay to the applicant the sum of...