fell from the roof of a warehouse

The “Appeal” supports a worker’s compensation of 1.2 million dirhams

The percentage of disability that the plaintiff failed to achieve was 40% of the original capacity of the skull and brain.

archival

The Court of Appeal upheld a ruling by the Abu Dhabi Court for Family and Civil and Administrative Claims, obligating a company and its owner to pay a worker one million and 200 thousand dirhams in compensation for the material and moral damages he sustained, as a result of negligence and failure to provide the necessary security and prevention means to protect workers, which led to him falling from the roof of a warehouse and injuring him with a disability. permanent.

The court rejected the worker's request to increase the amount of compensation to five million dirhams, and also rejected the request of the defendants against them to cancel the judgment of the first degree.

In the details, the worker filed a lawsuit against a company and its owner, asking them to oblige them to pay him what is due to him from the legal blood money for the members that were injured, and which constitute permanent disabilities, and redress for the material, moral and psychological damage he sustained at a value of five million dirhams, indicating that he was exposed to a fall from a height inside company.

A penal judgment was issued against the owner of the company, which fined him.

In the ruling, the court stated that the evidence of the penal ruling was the conviction of the defendant as the owner of the company.

The court relied on the report of the medical committee that showed the percentage of disability that the plaintiff had left behind 40% of the original ability of the skull and brain, loss of vision in the left eye 50%, hearing loss in the left ear 50%, fractures of the nose and loss of sense of smell and taste 100%, paralysis of the left face and the inability to Closure of the eye with a disability rate of 35% of the original facial nature, and systolic paralysis of the left arm 50% of the capacity of the arms, in addition to his entitlement to compensation for wounds, cracks and scars, in addition to what affected him in his work and his ability to earn because the plaintiff is in his early forties, in addition to The pain, sadness, grief, and heartbreak that befell him in his feelings, emotions and feelings as a result of the injury.

The court ruled to oblige the defendants to pay the plaintiff one million and 200 thousand dirhams as material and moral compensation for the damage he sustained.

The person convicted in his favour (the appellant) did not accept the judgment and appealed it and submitted a document in which he requested that his appeal be accepted in form, and in its subject matter, the amount of his claim before the first instance was judged. His benefit was lost, according to what was proven by the forensic medical report.

The appellee demanded that the appealed judgment be rescinded and the judiciary rejecting the case with all its contents, submitting the expert report and not reliance on it, and exaggerating the estimation of compensation, and in precaution, returning the papers to forensic medicine in another body and with the same secretariat to prepare its report in light of their objections to the expert report before the first instance, and as a matter of total precaution, the appeal was rejected The original judge and the court to cancel the appealed judgment and to again amend the amount of compensation awarded to the appropriate limit, taking into account the lack of reliance on the defective expert report.

The Court of Appeal stated that the criminal judgment convicted the two defendants for the incident.

It concluded to assess the original appellant entitled to the physical injuries and resulting disabilities, as indicated above, at the amount of 950,000 dirhams, in addition to 250 thousand dirhams for moral damages in the grief, sorrow and heartbreak he suffered due to the appellant's mistake. against them originally, cross-appellants.

The Court of Appeal indicated that it shares the judgment of the Court of First Instance in its appreciation and conclusion of the total amount of compensation and its sufficiency to console the appellant for the physical abuse and disability incurred by him, and considering the persistence of his disability and psychological suffering as a result of it, and the amounts estimated to compensate him included the difficulties he encounters in carrying out his life burdens. and process, and what may affect his employment opportunities.

It ruled to accept the two appeals in form, reject them in substance, and uphold the appealed ruling.

Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news