Gorman v Knight Central G M Co Ltd [1911] ZATPD 96 (26 June 1911)

Statute - Interpretation - General Words - "Or" - Master and Servant - Workmen's Compensation - "Partial Incapacitation" - "Diminished Capacity" - Magistrate's Court Practice - Allegation of "Trade or Apprenticeship" - Rule 8 of Procl.21 of 1902 - Act 36 of 1907, sect.17(b)

The Court will only construe "or", used in a statute, as "and" when the natural meaning would give rise to an interpretation unreasonable, inconsistent or unjust.

A workman is partially incapacitated, within the meaning of Act 36 of 1907, sect.17(b), if, owing to the injury, he is unable either to resume work, similar to that at which he was employed at the time of the accident, or to do work for which he was fitted by trade or apprenticeship, prior to the accident.

The dimished capacity of the workman to earn wages, within the meaning of Act 36 of 1907, sect.17(b) is his diminished capacity by reason of such permanent partial incapacitation, as is proved to be due to the accident. Consequently, if the workman, when he resumes work, similar to that at which he was employed at the time of the accident, is able to earn the same wages as he was earning at the date of the accident, he is not entitled to compensation for permanent partial incapacitation, even though he is so incapacitated.

In a claim for compensation an allegation merely to the effect that plaintiff has been permanently partially incapacitated for work within the meaning of Act 36 of 1907, sect.17(b) entitles him to lead evidence to prove what work he was fitted to do by trade or apprenticeship, prior to the accident, but the defendant will be entitled to an adjournment in order for him to meet the case then set up, if he so desire.